Initially my rationale and what I wanted to research was very clear in my mind. However, I struggled to come up with a singular research question. As my ideas progressed, I landed on not so much of a question, rather a statement of intent, followed by a series of questions I wanted to address through my research.
It became apparent through my initial readings that I would need to utilise a few different research methods to be able to answer my question/questions.
One method that stood out was ethnography as a qualitative research method which would allow me to use techniques such as observations, interviews and focus group activities.
As my research question has an element of social justice /activism, this method would allow me to observe my participants in their educational environment to understand their experiences, perspectives and everyday practices.
(Kara, 2017) points out that academics in education are often encouraged to conduct activist research with the aim of reducing inequalities based on prejudice. As part of our ARP’s we were tasked as academics and educators to have an element of social justice within our research so that our research can be used as a force for good.
Multiple types of data, researcher viewpoints, theoretical frames, and methods of analysis allow different facets of problems to be explored, increases scope, deepens understanding, and encourages consistent (re) interpretation.(Tracy, 2010, p.844)
My ARP Research cycle
Question?
To support my ideas of using various research methods, I reviewed literature along the themes of interviews, and focus groups.
(Vaughn, Sinagub and Jeanne Shay Schumm, 1996) Write that focus groups can be used alone or with other methods, both qualitative and quantitative for a wide range of purposes. Focus groups can present a great deal of specific information on a selected topic in a short space of time.
This was something I wanted to take advantage of, as finding the time along all my other commitments was challenging!
I also planned to conduct semi-structured face to face interviews with students and tutors.
I developed a list of questions I wanted to ask but was happy to deviate from this and wanted the interviews to feel much like a conversation. As a result I planned to be careful at the start of the interview by not giving away too much as to the context and specifics questions within the interview.
I very much liked the idea of taking an emphatic approach and the sharing of experiences in order to build trust and engage in a give and take, real conversation.
“The interview subject has potentially much value to say, but this calls for the researcher to actively lead or support that subject into intelligent talk. Interviewer and interviewee thus collaborate in the co-construction of knowledge”.(Alvesson, 2011,p7)
After I submitted my 1st ethics form I had more time to think about the feasibility of delivering on all the different aspects of my research and the best and most time efficient way for me to gather information.
It was at this point, and on the advice of a colleague who recently completed their PGcert, that I had a re-think and decided to utilise two of my current and planned DPS lectures for my ARP.
I decided to use these lectures after I realised that the lecture topics around placements and placement experiences were suitable for my research.
However, after the making the decision to use the lectures for my ARP I came across a dilemma I wasn’t sure how to deal with.
“Be prepared to modify your plans about what and how to collect as you enter the setting and discover both unexpected opportunities and blocks.”(Cousin, 2008, p139)
(Kara, 2017) also discusses how sometimes, all the theories and resources designed to help us research ethically can only go so far and cannot account for every eventuality!
I experienced this with these two lectures, time was against me as I only made the decision to use the lectures for my research a day before the 1st lecture!
I decided to use a “final years feedback” lecture as an opportunity to conduct a form of peer-to-peer observational focus group. The lecture itself was pretty much set up this way, so I did not need to make any amends to the structure of the planned lecture. However, I would need to record the session and seek consent from a large group of students (121!) and 7 student panellists!
I particularly like the idea of the “snowballing” effect that can occur during focus groups. Being able to observe students responding to panellists during a Q&A, as well as other advantages such as synergism, simulation, security and spontaneity. I already had a series of questions to ask the panellists but added 3 more questions that related specifically to my research. However, fundamentally, the focus group would allow and encourage natural interactions between the peer groups.
The 2nd lecture was a “preparation for DPS” session based on placements. For this session I decided to use a mind mapping activity I had used in other lectures and amended it to focus on asking specific questions relating to my research (still relating to placements). This activity-based observation would allow for both qualitive and quantitative thematic analysis. However, again I would have to figure out a way to get consent from a large group of students (140!)
As a result, there was a need for me to pivot and assess the approach of using existing lectures for my research (as outlined in ethics blog.) I found myself having to ask for advice from my tutors and make further considerations on how to obtain participants consent in a public yet discreet way.
All whilst protecting their right to refuse participation, but still allowing them to fully participate in the session. This was a challenge, but it was interesting to consider the variety of ways and materials by which consent can be obtained. Although a little stressful. I actually enjoyed the problem solving and having to think on my feet!
After consulting with my tutors and after much deliberation on the most ethical way to proceed, I decided on the following approach based on these considerations:
- To protect students right to refuse participation.
- Ensure students don’t feel put on the spot or pressured into giving consent by devising a way for refusal of consent to be given discreetly.
- For lecture 1. Devise a feasible way of pausing the recording if students did not wish to be recorded during their participation in Q&A.
- For lecture 2. Devise a method for all students to participate in mind mapping activity which allowed for only consenting participants to submit their maps for research.
- Ensure All students were able to fully participate in the lecture, regardless of if they had given consent or not.
Research methods:
Method 1
What: Literature review
Why: Understand the current landscape and scope of placements and careers in the fashion industry.
How: Review of current UAL policies and practices in the area of professional development, careers and employability. Current sources of information from specialist industry practitioners and organisations in global fashion, luxury fashion and emergent markets.
Method 2 Secondary data for Quantitative analyses
What: UAL /SITS Portal
Why: Add factual relevance and context to research topic in support of rationale with quantitative data on current student placement locations.
How: Used my gatekeeper access to collect data on current student placement locations.
Method 3.1 Qualitive data for thematic analyses.
What: DPS 2nd year, “into to DPS” preparation lecture. Q&A Final years feedback session. Peer to peer observational focus group.
Why: Understand the realities of student experiences on placement from students who have returned from working in industry. What kind of questions and queries do 2nd year students have in relations to placements and working in industry.
How: Audio record and observe answers to questions asked to final year students by DPS tutors and 2nd year students. Observe and record peer to peer interactions during Q&A. All students gave consent to be recorded.
Where: CSM LVMH theater- Attendance- 121 2nd year students, 7 final year student panelists.
Method 3.2 Qualitive and quantitative data for thematic analyses.
What: DPS 2nd year, “into to DPS” preparation lecture. In lecture activity.
Why: Review students current placement aspirations and motivations. What are their “dream placements”, with whom do they want to work for and where are they located geographically?
How: Set up and deliver student mind-mapping activity. Students create two mind maps.
1 map completed in pairs to highlight student awareness of global brands or businesses located outside of Europe and the US.
1 mind map completed individually that highlights students ideal placement brand/business and its location geographically. Only students who gave consent handed in their activity sheets after the session.
Where: CSM LVMH theater- Attendance- 140 2nd year students.
Method 4 Qualitive data for thematic analyses.
What: Semi-Structured interviews with 2ND Year DPS students and Fashion programme tutors/ pathway leaders.
Why: Ascertain student and tutors views, opinions, expectations, knowledge, motivations and aspirations in regards to placements.
How: Audio recorded face to face semi structured interviews. 3 fashion programme pathway leaders and 3 2nd year DPS student.
Tutor selection: 3 tutors from 3 of the 8 fashion courses. Selected to account for representation of course size and specialism, gender, age.
Student selection: 3 students from 3 of the 8 fashion courses. Selected at random to account for representation of ethnicity, gender, age.
Two students consented to be video recorded as I originally wanted to create a video clip of students interviews, however, I later decided to only use the voice recording to create a transcript for all interviews for consistency as not everyone agreed to be filmed.
Where: In-person in CSM and online on MS teams.
Session challenges: Sound quality of recording is poor, so transcription is poor. This is despite the fact that participants used a microphone when speaking. Lessons learnt: Test audio facilities beforehand session with team and ensure you use a suitable device to pick up sound recording as I believe the mic on my laptop was not strong enough
“you begin to make judgments on the basis of the emerging analysis about how many more people you want to interview and what kind of experiences you would like them to reflect. Theoretical sampling means that you talk to more people to go more deeply into the issue”(Cousin, 2008, p.80)
Please see below interview schedule for both tutor and student interviews.
APR-2nd-Year-DPS-student-research-interview-questions-1DOWNLOAD
APR-Fashion-programme-tutor-interview-questions-1DOWNLOAD
Please see below student and tutor interview transcripts.
ARP-Research-interview-transcript-fashion-programme-pathway-leader-1DOWNLOAD
ARP-Research-interview-transcript-fashion-programme-pathway-leader-2DOWNLOAD
ARP-Research-interview-transcript-fashion-programme-pathway-leader-3DOWNLOAD
ARP-Research-interview-transcript-2nd-year-fashion-student-1DOWNLOAD
ARP-Research-interview-transcript-2nd-year-fashion-student-2DOWNLOAD
ARP-Research-interview-transcript-2nd-year-fashion-programme-student-3DOWNLOAD
Please see below lecture 1 DPS final years feedback session presentation with consent slide.
DPS-Final-years-feedback-session-with-ARP-consent-11-23DOWNLOAD
Please see below transcript of final years feedback session.
ARP-Research-transcript-DPS-final-years-feedback-session-with-2nd-years-fashion-studentsDOWNLOAD
Please see below lecture 2 Preparation for DPS session with consent slide.
Preparing-for-your-DPS-journery-part-2-with-ARP-consent-November-2023DOWNLOAD
Please see below examples of completed student activity mind maps.