Proceso rizomático en la pintura

Interviews are essential data sources in a case study design (Yin, 2009) and two types of interviews were employed in this RE: semi structured and realist. Semi-structured interviews were used to gain information from pupils, parents and professionals involved in the Forest School programme. The Realist Interview (RI), which is

discussed in more detail later, occurred in order to check the findings of the case study with the four Forest School staff, within a scientific realist framework (Pawson, 2006). Semi-structured interviews were selected for data gathering purposes because they are targeted and insightful (Yin, 2009), allowing specific and more open questions to be asked which can support accurate programme specification development (Pawson and Tilley, 1997). Pilots were conducted in order to avoid bias which can result from poorly designed interviews and interviews were recorded where possible to ensure accurate recall. It is acknowledged that interviewees may be tempted to provide answers they believe the interviewer wants to hear (Yin, 2009). Therefore, explanatory passages were read out at the start of each interview to explain the researcher’s role and the purpose of the interview, emphasising the importance of gaining the interviewee’s honest view. Interview participants gave informed written consent and no deception was involved (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2011).

3.9.3.4.1 Telephone Interviews with Parents

Parents who gave informed written consent for their child to be involved in the case study (n=4) were asked whether they would consent to being contacted by telephone to give their perspective on the impact of Forest School on their child. Parents who gave consent for this (n=2) were then contacted by telephone due to the convenience of this approach, reduced interviewer effects and lack of reliance on literacy (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2011). At the beginning of the telephone interview the purpose of the conversation was explained and further verbal consent gained. The interview structure was piloted with two other adults and the transcripts can be found in appendix 8.10. Although only a very small (n=2) parental population was accessed, this anecdotal information can be used as part of a triangulated approach to refine CMOCs and support the development of an understanding of parental view which does not yet appear to have been sought for this population of young people accessing Forest School.

3.9.3.4.2 Interviews with Young People

Roe and Aspinall (2011b) avoided seeking pupil views due to the potential of inducing anxiety when an unfamiliar researcher attempts to interview extremely vulnerable young people. However, pupil views are important (Greig, Taylor and MacKay, 2013) and, if possible and appropriate, should therefore be represented in the programme specification. Indeed, young people are amongst the most critical stakeholders in this

project and “it is increasingly accepted that children are co-constructors of meaning and do have a valid perspective worthy of inclusion in research” (Greig, Taylor and MacKay, 2013, p. 208).

Due to varying levels of literacy ability amongst the young people, it was deemed more appropriate to conduct semi-structured interviews at Forest School rather than ask them to complete a written questionnaire, which could potentially be stress inducing and yield limited results (Nind, 2008). Three out of the four pupils who gave informed consent to be observed also gave consent to be interviewed and recorded, both in written form prior to the study and verbally at the beginning of the interview. These semi-structured interviews were conducted at Forest School on the second day of observations, so that the young people had time to become familiar with the researcher. The researcher used skills gained in prior professional practice working with vulnerable young people to engage sensitively and respectfully, with ethical considerations to the fore (BPS, 2010). These skills focused on building rapport with the young people, being non-judgemental of their views and attuned to the verbal and non-verbal communication regarding whether they are happy to continue the interview.

3.9.3.4.3 Interviews with Forest School Staff

In an RE it is crucial to target individuals who know the programme well and can comment on elements related to context, mechanisms and outcomes (Pawson and Tilley, 1997). Therefore, the four members of staff attending Forest School alongside the young people were interviewed (appendix 8.7). The semi-structured interview was designed in two parts; firstly to allow the participant to talk openly about their views of Forest School and secondly to ask them specifically about their view on outcomes which had surfaced in the literature as part of the RS. A pilot of the semi-structured interview script was conducted to ensure the questions were appropriate, non-leading and accessible. Two different FSLs working within the same LA were contacted and gave informed consent to be interviewed as part of a pilot. The semi-structured interview scripts were subsequently modified to reflect the responses of the pilot participants to the questions in appendix 8.6.

Informed written consent from the Forest School staff was sought and obtained for the purpose of refining the first programme specification by seeking their view of the

outcomes, contextual factors and hidden mechanisms at work, or the “circumstances, actions or thoughts that relate to the acknowledged outcomes” (Shepherd, 2011, p. 57). As four views will be probed, this gives scope for triangulation during thematic analysis of the transcripts, which will be used for “identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (themes) within data” (Braun and Clarke, 2006, p. 79). More detail will be provided later about data analysis and how the second programme specification was developed.