TRABAJOS TOPOGRÁFICOS DE CAMPO ADICIONALES

Similar to semi-structured interviews where questions are pre-set with a considerable degree of flexibility in the wording and sequence from one participant to the other, in narrative interviews, ‘generative narrative questions’ (Riemann and Schutze 1987: 353) are used. Where a narrative relevant to this thesis was needed, a generative narrative question pertaining to that area was formulated. This type of questions, according to Flick (2014: 266), is formulated ‘broadly, yet at the same time sufficiently specifically for the interesting experiential domain to be taken up as a central theme. Within pre-set parameters, participants were empowered to lead the interview process. As Curtis et al. (2014:114-115) explain,

if a participant starts talking about something which you had not previously considered, this is not generally thought to be problematic…this type of interview normally encourages participants to add their own thoughts - after all, this approach believes that it is important to identify what is most significant for the participants.

In the sense of the foregoing, narrative interviews fall within the spectrum of ‘structured’ and ‘unstructured’ (Opie 2010: 118, Punch 2009: 146-147) interviews. Unlike structured interviews with stronger stringency on specific questions, wording sequence, and uniformity for all interviewees, unstructured interviews presuppose nothing about the direction of the interview, the researcher tends to follow the interviewee’s flow of ideas and different questions are asked in different sequences amongst the interviewees.

From a practical sense, and as was realised in the process of this thesis, the level of structure in interviews is a matter of degree. Terminologies like ‘unstructured’ are potentially misleading and shy of clarity because however loose, there is always some inherently assigned direction for interview. By the topic and the purpose of the research, the researcher already imposes some structure and parameters within which both the interviewee and interviewer must navigate. The spectrum of ‘structuredness’ of interviews is therefore a much extended one with some interviews more structured than others and non can be fully unstructured. Rather than focussing on terminologies, attention was paid more to practical steps that were most likely to secure the objectives of this thesis.

were past students who fall under a marginalised group of people, I concur with Swain et al. (1998), and Parker and Lynn (2002) who support the view that this group of participants require a method that will not continue to marginalise but that which will instead give them a voice. Participants were able to voice what they considered important to them as opposed to being constrained to selecting only information thought to be important for the researcher. Through using face-to-face open narrative interview meetings (as opposed to other methods) participants were able to engage in self-disclosures and ‘tell their own stories’ (Barron, 1999: 38).

Interviews lasting between 1 and 1.5 hours each were planned with each participant with the possibility of a follow-up interview weeks after the first. The benefits of using follow-up interviews are exemplified in Malbon’s (1999, p. 33) research on ‘clubbers’, where follow-up interviews were used to gather more data, clarify and substantiate previous data, and seek respondent validation. Only four out of ten of the interviewees were interested in being contacted the second time. While the second interview session was very brief, in some cases just confirming that there were no emergent concerns, the initial interviews were more robust.

Even when the intention was to focus on specific topics of interest, the questions were broad and open-ended to allow the participant significant leeway on how participants choose to respond. The order and wording of the questions depended on the interviewee’s response. For instance, if participants talked in generalities, they were encouraged to give relevant examples or more specific details. To obtain as much detail as possible, consideration was given to the nine varieties of questions suggested by Kvale (1996). These included introductory questions, follow up questions, probing questions, specifying questions, direct questions, indirection

questions, structuring and interpreting questions. Regardless of the number of questions asked of each participant, steps were taken to ensure that all the topics are covered and with all the participants being similarly treated.

Participants were facilitated to narrate their experiences and highlight their perceptions in relation to their schooling experiences. In line with the epistemological and ontological stance in this thesis, the perceptions of the participants, however subjective, were their realities. Delgado and Stefancic (op. cit. p. xvii) support this view by explaining that ‘our social world, with its rules, practices, and assignments of prestige and power, is not fixed; rather, we construct it with words, stories, and silence [though] we need not acquiesce in arrangements that are unfair and one-sided.’

Drawing on the role and behaviour of the audience in traditional West African storytelling, a technique of active listening was used to facilitate participants to share their experiences. Active listening requires not only confirmation of understanding by the listener but also required the listener to ask relevant questions (Earthy and Cronin 2008: 429). This was easy for me to achieve for as seen from my autobiographical account in Chapter One, I was privileged to have shared references with the participants and their stories. As a child, I also grew up telling and listening to stories as a regular evening event. By realising that I was able to empathise with them, the participants felt comfortable telling their stories. This empathetic relationship between storyteller and listener is very typical of storytelling within indigenous traditional African settings where the audience would sometimes mimic the actions of the storyteller. Depending on the story, questions beginning with ‘why’ and ‘how’ may be asked. Sometimes simple questions like ‘and then what happened?’ could be asked.

All the interviews were tape recorded. This enabled the capturing of everything said in the process. In addition to this audio recording, notes were made on significant gestures, body language and other expressions.