3.3.6 Sampling

Initially, the sample of four students (one from each of Years 7, 9, 10 and 12) was selected simply to straddle the age ranges in the secondary phase of education. It might appear that years 11 and 13 were more obvious choices to accompany 7 and 9, but I felt that external examinations were likely to be of greater significance to students in those years and that being asked to participate in a project of this nature might have a detrimental impact on their studies. The findings from the selected key informants or participants (as I chose to term them to reflect their level of involvement and influence) might then assist the selection of further respondents. However of more crucial importance was the mechanism of theoretical sampling in which pertinent data is sought (rather than people) to enable emerging categories and their properties to be tested, elaborated and refined. (Charmaz, 2006).

Informants for this second phase of study were chosen simply by convenience; those students who were available and willing to talk for around half an hour at times which would cause them the least inconvenience. (See Appendix D for the composition of the range of students involved). Rather than seeking potential respondents who might be in a positio

n to elaborate emerging concepts, I decided to select images which would test, challenge and extend the ideas, though the images were a subset of those captured by the previous cohort of participants. This also meant that the imagery overload mentioned in the previous section could be avoided whilst focusing on the specific themes needing further exploration. This was done by putting together a sequence of 'pages' (once again using the interactive whiteboard software so that annotations could be added to the images should the participants feel the need) As Fig 6 shows, the first few images were shown in isolation in order to assist the participant to focus tightly on what they felt was represented in each one. They were then shown trios, each image within the trio previously having been coded within an emerging category, and asked whether the images on the page had anything in common or in what ways they differed. On the final page the participants whether they could move the images into an order or sequence and if so, what did that range represent.After each interview the data from the responses of the participant were coded, sometimes using previously generated codes and sometimes with new codes. This enabled the properties and dimensions of the emerging categories to be tested and expanded, and in a couple of instances discarded. In the light of the revisions taking place, the images presented to each subsequent participant could be substituted to further explore areas of significance.At the end of each interview, the participants were offered the opportunity to follow up their comments by having use of a camera to capture supplementary images to extend or highlight what they had said. Only one actually took up this offer.

[Next]