Online discussion boards for focus group interviews: an exploratory study

Certain attributes of information and communication technology have many potentially useful applications for qualitative research. With reference to an exploratory study, in this paper we consider how online discussion boards can facilitate the collection of qualitative data from focus group interviews. We also evaluate the advantages and limitations of conducting these interviews through online discussion. The increasing usage of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in educational institutions has a significant impact on qualitative research in education (Burgess 1995). ICTs have been used to help record, sort, retrieve and analyse qualitative data. The applications of ICTs in qualitative research range from simple word processing to sophisticated data sorting, retrieval and analysis (eg using QUALPRO, ETHNOGRAPH and NUD•IST). The contexts, experiences, potentials and limitations of using these ICT packages have been well documented (Armstrong 1995; Tallerico 1991; Weaver & Atkinson 1995). However, most of these research studies only look at the methodological features of qualitative data analysis to consider how, how much, and how well it can be computerised (Richards & Richards 1998). In this paper, we consider how ICT can be used to facilitate the collection of qualitative data, relating the experiences of one author in using an online discussion board to conduct a focus group interview for an exploratory study. We also evaluate the advantages and limitations of using ICT in such interviews. Focus group interviews Purposes Focus groups rely on interaction within a group, rather than a question-and-answer format. Through debating issues and struggling to understand how other group ONLINE DISCUSSION BOARDS FOR FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEWS 51 members interpret key terms, interviewees are more likely to contribute their views than in a one-on-one interview (Morgan 1988). Moreover, interviewees may feel more at ease and spontaneous in a group situation, especially if they are classmates, colleagues or close friends (Bers 1994). According to Morgan (1998), focus group interviews are: 1. methods for collecting qualitative data to be analysed and related to research questions 2. focused efforts for gathering data on specific topics 3. group discussions to generate data across a range of experiences and opinions. A focus group interviewer must balance a directive role with that of a moderator, which calls for managing the dynamics of the group being interviewed; he/she ‘must simultaneously worry about the script of questions and be sensitive to the evolving patterns of group interaction’ (Frey & Fontana 1998). Blumer (1969, p 41) claims that interviewees should be ‘acute observers’ and ‘well-informed’, because ‘a small number of such individuals brought together as a discussion and resource group, is more valuable many times over than any representative sample’. The purposes of focus group interviews are threefold. First, they are intended to probe intensively for qualitative data related to a specific area of study. They are especially useful for exploration and discovery of topics that are poorly understood, providing contextual information and depth. Through a process of investigating their similarities and differences and sharing and comparing, participants generate their own interpretations of the discussion topics. Second, focus group interviews may be used to generate new ideas prior to a quantitative research study. For example, interview data provide evidence of how participants typically talk about the topic in question, ensuring inclusion of items/scales that may otherwise have been ignored in the construction of a survey. Third, these interviews may be conducted to elicit participants’ experiences and reactions to a lesson, an education ICT package, or an idea that requires testing before implementation or further development. In this paper, only the first and third purposes of focus group interviews are discussed. Challenges The main strength of this qualitative method is its ability to elicit rich data that are more cumulative and elaborate than individual responses (Morgan 1998). The flexible format of focus group interviews, plus the interaction within the group, tends to enable collection of data with relatively little direct input from the researcher. However, focus groups do pose certain challenges for an interviewer. CHER PING LIM AND SENG CHEE TAN 52 On a practical level, it is always difficult to get all participants together at the same time and place. This is especially so if they are busy professionals based in different locations. Moreover, selecting an interview site that meets the needs of participants and the researcher may pose a problem. The site must be easily accessible to participants, yet be an environment suitable for audio-recording. Once the time and the place have been confirmed, carrying out the interview itself can be challenging. Compared to individual interviews, the researcher has less control over the data generated. This lack of control may pose a problem if there is ‘a clear set of predefined issues or a strong need to maintain strict comparability across separate interviews’ (Morgan 1988). Moreover, emerging group culture may interfere with individual expression, and the views and stances of dominating participants may become that of the group a phenomenon known as ‘group-think’ (Fontana & Frey 1998). This may be a serious problem, especially if one person dominates the discussion. On the other hand, bringing together participants with vastly different opinions may produce group conflict. This may create barriers to active and easy interaction and jeopardise the success of the interview, such that only scattered data is collected. In both cases, the researchers must be equipped with the skills and experiences to handle the particular group dynamics and any conflict. They might also consider building back-up data collection methods into the research design. It is thus evident that collecting data through focus group interviews can be a challenging task. This raises two questions: • Is there an alternative way of collecting data from focus group interviews that has less inherent problems? • Do new technologies better faciliate the data collection process than traditional audio or video recordings? The following section is an account of how we used an online discussion board to conduct a focus group interview with tutors in the PED503/513 course at the National Institute of Education (Singapore). Drawing upon the experiences of the first author as interviewer, we explore the potentials and limitations of online discussion boards as platforms for conducting focus group interviews, and the implications these have for the roles of interviewers and interviewees. An exploratory study: the use of an online discussion board for a focus group interview Instructional Technology (PED503/513) is one of four core modules in the Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) program at the Singapore National Institute of Education. The module has an average annual intake of 900 and aims to acquaint students with skills for integrating Instructional Technology (IT) into their classroom practices. Due to large tutorial class sizes, and the tasks requiring ONLINE DISCUSSION BOARDS FOR FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEWS 53 completion in the two-hour tutorial slots, little dialogue has typically been possible between tutors and students. To encourage more dialogue in the tutorial groups and reflection on the lecture readings, online asynchronous discussions were introduced as an integral part of the course in the academic year 2000/2001, to complement the face-to-face tutorial sessions. The Communication Centre of the Blackboard platform was used. Blackboard is an off-the-shelf, integrated online delivery and management system. Each week, the tutors added a new forum onto the discussion board, based on issues raised in the lecture readings. Initially, the tutors facilitated and moderated these discussions, but after the first two weeks, students were assigned as moderators to ensure the efficient management and operation of the discussion board. Students were assessed based on their roles as moderators and participants in these discussions. As this was the first time that discussion boards were used in the PED503/513 course, the first interviewer, who was also the course coordinator, was concerned about how online discussions should be organised to facilitate the students’ learning. A study was thus designed to investigate this, using multiple strategies for data collection, including a focus group interview with the tutors. The resultant data was intended for triangulation against other data collected from observations and a student survey. When the researcher attempted to organise sessions to interview the 20 tutors in a group, he faced a major problem. About 40% of the tutors were only part-time, due to other commitments elsewhere during office hours. While the other 60% were full-time at the Institute, they were also all heavily involved in other courses and research projects. It was thus a formidable task to organise a focus group that could spend about one and a half hours talking about the online discussions in the course. There was also a concern that the voices of the part-time staff might be drowned by those of the more dominating full-time staff, resulting in ‘group think’. After some exploration, the first author decided that the anywhere/anytime, asynchronous nature of the online discussion board in Blackboard afforded the best platform for conducting these focus group interviews, particularly as all tutors were already familiar with it. A new forum was then added to the board as a topic for the focus group interview, titled: ‘Online discussions for the PED503/513 course’. Participants were given a brief description of the online discussions in the course and a list of objectives for the focus group interview (see Figure 1). The researcher then initiated the first thread of discussion, on the subject of whether the objectives of the online discussions for tutorials had been met. The focus group interview was conducted via the online discussion board for 12 days. All threads of discussion received at least six replies. As can be seen in Figure 1, the average length of postings was 128 words; long enough for the participants to express or defend their views, but not too long to deter other participants from reading them. CHER PING LIM AND SENG CHEE TAN 54 Figure 1: Participation details No. of participants 19