Data collection methods

• STAGE 1: [Preparation]
• STAGE 2 [Communication]
• STAGE 3 [Conduct of the interview]
• STAGE 4 [Follow up from the interview]
• Interview issues
• References

Interviews

The material below is drawn from the experience of the 37 one-to-one face-to-face interviews conducted as part of this project. As research interviews across several institutions, and undertaken for an externally funded project, some of what is described may be judged as unnecessary for a Centre seeking information for internal use only. It should, however, be useful to consider each of these points as a start for an interview process tailored to suit a Centre's needs.

STAGE 1: [Preparation]

1. *Determine the purpose of the interview, who should conduct the interviews and who should be interviewed
   The purpose was set by the grant submission and the consultant to the project (as the senior researcher) was chosen to conduct all the interviews. The consultant is an experienced interviewer with considerable experience in the higher education sector and is not affiliated with any one institution. Where the interviewer is known to the person being interviewed, rapport may be more readily established but there is a risk that the person being interviewed may be more guarded in their responses, or give what they perceive is the desired 'right' answer, especially if interviewed by someone in a position of authority. Those interviewed were selected on the basis that they were in the appropriate positions to provide informed comment and, where representative of a group, they could speak with sound knowledge and experience.

2. Clarify any ethical issues and deal with them appropriately
   Key ethical considerations are confidentiality and how the data will be collected and dealt with. It is essential, also, to gain ethics approval prior to the commencement of any research that will be reported externally.

3. Be very clear about what issues you wish the interview to cover
   The issues were derived from the scholarly literature and the experience of the team members. An initial lengthy list was refined to a set of themes and, from these, 8 issues were selected [see interview issues below]. 5 of these (those asterisked) were regarded as high priority issues that would be common to all interviews with the others to be included depending on how the interviewee chose to respond and if they chose to contribute their own agendas.

4. *Determine the length of the interview
   The number of issues covered and their complexity bears a direct relationship to the time allocated. 45-60 minutes is a fairly standard time for a face-to-face interview. Here, 90 minutes was the agreed maximum time with few interviews being shorter than 80 minutes.

5. *Determine the style of the interview
   In this project, the interview style was conversational. This meant that, while in practice, each person covered all the core issues at some time, the interviewer sought to privilege the respondent's voice and to make links between their comments and the next issue to be discussed. A structured linear interview – closer to an oral questionnaire – is likely to be more straightforward, especially for the interviewer.

6. Determine how the data will be collected, analysed and stored
   Many interviewers make notes during interviews to highlight key points to return to and those who use a more structured approach tend to use notes as an aide memoire. Where the focus is on the idea, rather than the words, such notes may suffice as the interview record. In this project the interviewer did not use notes, choosing to concentrate attention on the finer nuances on the conversation and maintain eye contact with the person being interviewed. While there may be some concern about an interview being recorded, experience indicates that the recording device tends to become taken for granted and does not appear to detract from candour. Recording is advantageous where there is a rapid flow of complex information and there is significance in the precise words being used and the order in which ideas are expressed. It allows opportunities for multiple listening and close analysis and means that the actual words of the person being interviewed are captured, rather than a quick impression or interpretation at the time by the interviewer. Digital recording technology assists data retrieval and storage and, where the analysis is done using computer software, the data are immediately in digital format. Listening to recordings of interviews is very time-consuming. For this project the interviews were transcribed by a transcription agent. Interviewees were then sent these transcriptions and were free to amend in any way they chose. They were then analysed by the interviewer within the methodological framework already agreed to, and the data responses encoded prior to access to the data beyond the immediate project team (in one instance, and by request, access was restricted to the interviewer). The original data files are securely stored in the university office of a project team member.

7. *Determine where, and when, the interview(s) will be held
   The number of interviews and also who is interviewed will depend on the availability and flexibility of both parties. Wherever possible, the space should be selected by the interviewee so they have ownership of the space and, presumably, will feel comfortable within it.

STAGE 2 [Communication]

8. *Communicate these decisions to those being interviewed

There is a fine balance between providing the necessary information to allow those invited to participate to make an informed decision and providing so much information that it becomes off-putting.

While issues were flagged to allow interviewees the opportunity to reflect on these and/or gather information before hand, and to assist them to feel confident, they were not given the actual questions for two main reasons: (1) this would have made the interview heavily pre-structured and mitigated against the conversational tone and (2) this would possibly have led to studied responses with the risk of forfeiting the immediacy and candour that emerged in the interviews.

In this project, information was sent by email to coordinators at the university concerned at least 10 days prior to the interviews being conducted. Those contacted were given the opportunity to decline the interview and also to seek further information.

STAGE 3 [Conduct of the interview]

9. Ensure that there is appropriate proximal space between the interviewer and the interviewee and that any recorder is obvious and reachable

   The interviewer asked the interviewee where they would prefer to sit and, whenever possible, the two sat at right angles to a low(ish) table where the tape recorder was placed. Interviewees were told that they could stop the recording at any time and speak 'off the record' and several took advantage of this. Having the tape recorder so accessible and obvious was a reminder that this was an 'on the record' conversation.

10. Cover the agreed issues within the agreed time
    Each interview commenced with confirmation of how the interview would be conducted and how ethical issues would be handled. At this time interviewees were given the opportunity to seek any further clarifications and/or assurances.

The interviewer used her judgement when necessary to balance greater depth of responses to some issues against the need to cover everything comprehensively. The respondent chose which issues to explore in detail and also had the opportunity to add issues. If the interviewee wishes to continue past the agreed time, this can, of course, be negotiated.

STAGE 4 [Follow up from the interview]

11. Monitor that the data have been used in the ways intended and as notified and agreed to

    In this project, all those with direct access to the data were fully aware of the ethical requirements and individually and collectively monitored data use.

12. Communicate outcomes from the interviews to those who participated
    Those interviewed were fully aware they were being interviewed as part of an ALTC funded project. Where their data have been used very explicitly each has been informed of this and their agreement received. On an institutional level, all universities that sought this as a condition of participation have received material for their approval prior to publication.

Interview issues

1. Your leadership role
   How do you see yourself as a leader? What do you understand by the term 'strategic leadership'? How would you illustrate your 'strategic' leadership?

   ['Strategic leadership' suggests that strategic leaders have the capacity to set directions, identify, choose and implement activities which create compatibility between internal organisational strengths and the changing external environment within which the university operates.]

2. Key stakeholders and key relationships
   Who are the key stakeholders? How do you know what they want and what do you do to satisfy them?

   [Prompt if no mention of students or professional bodies.]

   What are the key relationships of your role and how do you see your leadership role in managing these relationships? What makes these relationships useful for your University? How do you know if these relationships are working as intended?

3. Organisational redesign/(re)structuring
   Do you agree with Marginson (2000) that the sector required organisational redesign? What is your view of how this has been played out in your University? What, if any changes, would you have made in hindsight or would wish to have seen made?

   "While the restructuring of Centres is a common response to organisational or environmental changes, it may not be the most appropriate response when the issues to be addressed are cultural as much as structural" (Hart et al, 2005).

4. How you believe long-term learning and teaching performance is best enhanced
   [Prompt if: no mention of the role of AUQA and the awards and LTPF; no mention of APD and existence of a Centre.]

5. Purposes of a Teaching & Learning Institute/Centre
   The purposes of a Teaching and Learning Centre suited to the contemporary context of higher education challenge.

   • maintaining a corporate memory of, and sustained engagement in, the issues and innovations in teaching in higher education;
   • engaging in comprehensive and systematic implementation of teaching and learning initiatives;
   • creating and facilitating communities of learning involved in the iterative and dynamic top-down/bottom-up engagement and management of educational initiatives;
   • investigating, articulating and disseminating scholarship in (and on) teaching, learning and education development.
     

Chalmers and O'Brien (2005, p.51)

What do you see as the role of your Centre and how representative do you think this is of the role others (eg the executive and academic staff) would give it?

6. How you see your Institute/Centre responding to national and international developments in higher education
   What are these? [Prompt if no mention made of ICT, globalization, massification, workload issues, funding changes.]

7. How you will judge the effectiveness of your Teaching & Learning Centre over time

8. What, if anything, constrains you achieving your vision? How do you respond to this?
   "The effectiveness of Centres is constrained by assumptions about their role – what they are and what they do?" (Occasional Paper). Do you agree?

References

Chalmers, D. & O'Brien, M. (2005). 'Education development units and the enhancement of university teaching'. In K. Fraser (Ed.) Education Development and Leadership in Higher Education: Developing an effective institutional strategy. London: Routledge Falmer.

Hart, G., Austen, G., Cochrane, T., Daniel, R., Thelander, N. & Tweedale, R. (2005). 'Relevance, Challenge and Motivation: The ingredients of a novel managerial development program'. International Journal for Academic Development, 10(1), 47-57.

Marginson, S. (2000). 'Rethinking academic work in the global era'. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22(1), 23-37.

Support for this project website has been provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd, an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

The views expressed in the project do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Learning and Teaching Council.

Unless otherwise noted, content on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.5 Australia License.