Primera Reflexología: El fenómeno

Focus groups are a key component of this research. They were designed to give the boys voice; to meaningfully engage the boys in the research process through focus groups actively led by boys trained as student researchers. The focus groups were boy controlled and aimed at gaining in-depth insights from boys with minimal adult influence. These groups were to enable boys to collaborate and construct their own meanings in regard to their schooling. The focus groups were based on Vygotsky and other' s views, that knowledge is socially constructed through social interaction.

Focus groups are a research technique that collects data through group interaction on a topic determined by the researcher. In essence, it is the researcher' s interests that provide the focus, whereas the data comes from the group interaction (Morgan, 1 997, p. 6). The focus group was chosen as a method of collecting data because it was expected that the interaction between the members within each focus group in discussing an issue, would generate new perceptions and ideas; the boys could share information and construct some understanding together. The student focus groups had no adults present; this was designed to encourage more talk by the group of boys. It was hoped that by having a trained boy researcher as leader of each group, and with no adults present, that the boy participants would express themselves more openly and freely (see following

section for details on training). The intrusion of human observers or moderators can impact on the focus group participation and dynamics to an unknown extent (Gamson, 1 992 ; Morgan, 1 997). The researcher wanted to avoid this adult intrusion and give the students the opportunity to voice their ideas with complete freedom. For example, adult researchers could inadvertently n arrow the discussion by implicitly assuming which issues are important. The focus group discussions were audio-taped, the tape collected by the researcher at the end of each session. The tapes were then transcribed word-by­ word and analysed.

Over the years a number of guidelines, or as Morgan ( 1 997, p. 34) described them, 'rules of thumb' have developed to assist researchers with decisions on focus group structure.

According to these "rules of thumb", focus groups where possible should: (a) Use homogeneous strangers as participants . .

(b) Rely o n a relatively structured interview with high moderator involvement (c) Have six to ten participants per group.

(d) Have a total of three to five groups per project.

The focus groups in this research follow these general 'rules of thumb ' . The participants were randomly selected from each of the Year levels by the school involved, they may have known each other but it is unlikely that they were friends. There should have been homogeneity within the group. According to Morgan's 'Rule of Thumb' a more free flowing conversation would occur amongst the participants because they were of similar age and educational background. There were six participants per group with direction from a boy with mana or leadership within the school. The reasons for having only six participants per group was so that it would be easier for the boy leader to control and to obtain a clear response from each participant to the topic. Morgan ( 1 997) has found that as group numbers increase there is greater likelihood that leader/ moderator participation increases, there is less free discussion and some participants may not become fully involved in the focus group discussion.

Three focus groups were formed at each Year level, a total of nine within the school.

It has been found through social science and marketing research that having more than the three to five groups seldom provides more meaningful new ideas or insight. Data "saturation" is reached at around three to five groups, which is the point at which

additional data collected no longer generates new understanding (Morgan, 1 997, p. 43). The aim of the nine focus groups from the one school was to give an accurate "picture" of boys' ideas and perceptions for both the school and Year level without reaching "saturation" of data.

The focus groups used in the research are formal in structure because invited participants are used and a distinctive role is given to one of the participants as a group moderator (student research leader). The title moderator, highlights the roles orientation towards encouraging and assisting someone else ' s discussion. In this research the term moderator was replaced with the term student research leader. To assist the student research leader another student was selected to act as a recorder and to give support during the focus group sessions. The student research leader and recorder were selected from senior members (Year 1 3) of the school by the Dean of Year 1 3. These senior boys once selected gave their consent to participate and signed a confidentiality agreement. They had the opportunity to withdraw before this stage.

The student research leader was given suggested questions to ask during the focus group. In discussion with the student leaders further questions were developed that they thought appropriate. It was important that the student leaders felt that they could develop questions, to have freedom in the role of student researcher. The student leaders were shown how to adopt a "funnel-based" strategy to questioning. In a "funnel­ based" strategy, each group begins with a less structured approach that emphasises free discussion, and then moves towards a more structured discussion of specific questions. The focus group sessions fol1owed a similar format: (see Appendix G: Step-by-Step Instructions for Focus Groups)

1 . Welcome, introduction to research, setting of discussion rules and roles.

2. Brain storming session on following two questions:

"What do you think stops you from being successful and learning at school?"

"What helps you to be motivated and learn at school?"

Responses are recorded on large sheet of paper.

3 . Student Researcher leads a general discussion about school and learning experiences covering a range of set topics with opportunity to develop themes and ideas.

4. Summary of discussion. A reminder is given to participants of the ethical considerations, such as confidentiality. The students are thanked for their participation

To assist In the efficient operation of each focus group and to ensure that student research leaders could conduct a focus group session and ask appropriate questions training was given. The researcher carried out training using instruction methods of modelling and scaffolding to enhance understanding of their role of student researcher. The appointed group leaders and recorders received this training. The training encompassed two 45-minute sessions with the fol lowing agenda:

1 . Roles of Group leader and Group Recorder

2. Skills of a Good researcher

• _{Being an Active Listener} • _{Seeking elaboration to answers}

• _{Ensuring flow of discussion}

• _{Using a variety of questions}

3. Conducting a brainstorming session 4. Research ethics

5. Role Play of a Focus Group session

In conducting the pilot study it had been found that student research leaders required more training than was initially given and a more detailed structure for them to follow in guiding the focus group. In the main study an additional training session was given where the researcher modelled the conducting of a focus group session. The training sessions were held for 45 minutes on two consecutive days. A training handout for conducting the focus groups was devised (see Appendix H : Training Handout for Student Researchers) to explain roles and skills required in conducting focus groups was given to each student leader. The aim was to assist the student leaders understand their roles and to reinforce the information covered during the two training sessions.

The step-by-step focus group instruction handout was devised to guide and assist the student leader to act in a confident, purposeful manner. It also ensured some consistency between groups. It was to be used as a guide and not an edict. The additional training session and the Focus Group Guide had a positive result on .focus group data generation;

approximately thirty percent more talk was generated and data collected when comparisons were made between the pilot and main study focus groups. The student research leaders were more confident, and seven out of the nine researchers asked student participants to elaborate and/or justify their answers.

In the focus groups a u nique ethical issue arises due to the fact that what a participant discusses is inherently shared with all other participants of the group. This can raise serious privacy concerns. Morgan ( 1 997, p. 32) argued that if members of a focus group belong to the same subculture then the ethical concern can be somewhat alleviated. As each focus group consisted of boys from within the same Year level in the school they could constitute as a subgroup and thus the ethical concern is minimised.

It is critical that students understand that while these personal experiences contribute valuable to the group' s work, there i s a need to ensure that privacy of group members and interview participants i s maintained. Trust can be developed in the group when all participants feel safe and respected and act i n respectful ways to others. Establishing a code of behaviour or a common understanding about the topic of confidentiality can assist in the development of a trustful, safe and respected space for students. (Edwards,

1 999, p. 2 ] )

It was emphasised to all involved that confidentiality meant no one discussed or referred to what was said in focus groups outside the group. Student Researchers and participants had separate question and answer sessions with the researcher to develop a common understanding on privacy and confidentiality before signing a privacy and confidentiality statement as part of the consent process. A number of researchers (Fielding & Bragg, 2003 ; Smyth et al. 2000; Trent & Slade, 200 1 ) have conducted research with thousands of boys as active participants in focus groups and using other data generating methods; they have found boys spoke freely, articulately and with respect for each other' s views and confidentiality. Ethical concerns surrounding confidentiality and anonymity were found not to be an issue.