The semi-structured learner interview

Since it was participants’ experience, views, thoughts and perceptions that were to be investigated by the qualitative strand of the study, the research was bound to be qualitative.

As Patton says, we conduct interviews about phenomena that “we cannot directly observe”

(2002, p. 340) and professional development is clearly not easily observable, unless

prolonged observation is used. The present study was not longitudinal in its strictest sense, therefore informants who were in the position to observe instances or aspects of professional development were selected to recount their observations. Experienced students were thus chosen as “unique informants with a unique perspective” (Patton, 2002, p. 347). Unstructured or semi-structured interviews appeared to be adequate as they allow the researcher to learn from the participant who acts as an expert of the phenomenon under scrutiny (deMarrais, 2004). In this study, the participants were considered to be experts since they had been exposed to the teaching of a large number of language teachers. Consequently, an interview guide for a phenomenological interview was developed in order to explore how experienced learners perceive the development and knowledge of teachers of English as a foreign language (EFL). The semi-structured interview format was selected since it allowed for both flexibility within and consistency across interviews. Knowing that “predesigned and structured instruments blind the researcher to the site” (Miles and Huberman, 1994), the aim was to keep the interviews as unstructured as possible in order to allow participants to elaborate on their views. Every attempt was made to capture informants’ “understandings in their own terms [author’s emphasis]” (Patton, 2002, p. 349). At the same time, a standardised protocol was worked out in order to provide a framework for articulating those understandings. Using the semi-structured interview protocol in fact resulted in most participants summarizing not only their experience in learning English but their experience in learning other languages as well.

The learners’ did not only recount observations of their English teachers but those of teachers of other languages as well. Moreover, one participant ended up theorizing about English language teaching (Ann) and another one about education in general (Steven).

The interviews were conducted in the learners’ mother tongue¹, Hungarian in all cases, since it was believed that using the mother tongue would yield richer data. The questions were

1 All the ensuing participant quotes were translated by the author.

designed to elicit what kind of knowledge a teacher needs, whether they have been taught by a good English or other language teacher, what made this teacher a good one, what training teachers need during their career, etc. Learners were also asked to draw a graphic representation of a language teacher’s career or a learning curve and explain it to the researcher. Biodata was collected about each learner participant but factual questions were kept to a minimum as is recommended in the relevant literature to avoid boredom (Patton, 2002, p. 353). Nevetheless, background information was collected concerning the type of English language education participants had had. (See the complete Interview guide in Hungarian and in English in Appendix A)

The validation process was made up of several steps. The interview protocol was first tested with college students. This resulted in supplying further questions and prompts. The questions: “Have you ever had a real good English teacher? What made her a good one?”

”What institution did you learn English in?” or “What should a teacher of English learn if they decide to attend a course?” were added following the advice of an expert-researcher.

Furthermore, the validation process prepared the researcher to be able to provide maximum freedom to the participants in the interviews. Also, the validation interviews served as excellent practice opportunities for the researcher to improve interviewing skills for later research interviews.

Apart from the validation interviews, the first round of interviews, too, resulted in the slight modification of the interview protocol. The task of having to draw a learning curve was extended to include both reality and the ideal situation in the second round of the interviews since many of the first round participants wished to clarify the question by asking “Do you mean ideally or in reality?”. Even so, the question was not converted into a limiting one, as the participants were asked to freely decide what they would like to include in the graphic

representation. As it can be seen in Appendix D, some participants wished to include more than two dimensions.

To illustrate how the learner participants were allowed to follow their own lines of thought and given maximum freedom to elaborate on their thoughts, let us now have a look at an excerpt from the first round of interviews and the diagram described in the excerpt.

Tina: So, I’m supposed to put this on a diagram…

Researcher: Yes, some sort of axis x and axis y.

Tina: There must be stagnation. This is time, and these are the years.

R: The year?

Tina: How shall I break it up?

R: It is up to you, but years and time, that’s the same for me.

Tina: How shall I break it up?

R: Any way you would like to.

Tina: So, then, this is knowledge and this is time. These are the two things we are interested in. With a view to learning, I am positive that until she gets to the point of starting to teach at the beginning of her career, that’s a very intensive knowledge growth phase and from that point onward, when they start teaching, that’s learning of a different nature.

R: I see.

Tina: That’s when she starts using what she has learnt, applying it in practice.

Evidently, that’s a different… She is learning but not in the same form as at the university…

R: So, that’s not that intensive?

Tina: No, it’s not that intensive, and it’s of a different nature. During their university years, they probably obtain a lot of lexical knowledge, while the practical phase, that’s the practical application of that knowledge, which is also a learning process, because at the beginning they don’t know how to do it, and that’s another learning process.

R: So, here you are talking about two different things. There is the lexical knowledge…

Tina: Yes, lexical and practical.

R: Practical knowledge?

Tina: Yes, therefore, the career will have to be divided into two…

R: So, you will need two diagrams?

Tina: We can start with the theoretical, right from the very first English class.

Or if I insist on starting it from … (pause) university studies. I’m sure it’s not just lexical knowledge, there must obviously be practical classes as well, but this is certainly very intensive accumulation of knowledge. And then they start the teaching career, the practical application. And it’s very likely that from this point onwards the accumulation of lexical knowledge is reduced and the practical

application starts growing. And then we reach a point when the teacher has so much practical experience that stagnation starts. Still, during the application phase, as I said, in order to be up-to-date, I need to develop the knowledge curve as well. But to that extent.

R: I see. So, I think you’d like two diagrams.

Tina: Because let’s say, it is lexical knowledge that she picks up during the years at university…And she has little practical knowledge because she only teaches her peers and…So, this the beginning of the career, and lexical knowledge grows in a linear fashion, a steeper curve. Practical knowledge is minimal, I don’t know how much practicum they have, but that’s what I think. By the time they get their degrees, they must have had a year’s practice or so. And it is here that the practical starts, the steeper… And then it’s not that… Here there is keeping it up… It’s not that sharp… A few years, when somebody has picked up so much practical knowledge that certain things become a routine. And then it’s not that intensive again. Perhaps towards the end, it’s the lexical again.

R: Some new energies are released?

Tina: Perhaps, it’s not necessarily more…But perhaps it requires more effort.

Perhaps. Since she has taught for a certain period…

R: And then the need arises to develop her lexical knowledge…

Tina: And that’s when they get it wrong, yes.

R: How?

Tina: At the beginning of their career everyone is enthusiastic, and then, when they could reap the benefits, then they face burn-out. There are a lot of reasons for this, many of them understandable. If they could at that point find something that motivates them, they could reap the benefits and they could achieve gains on the basis of the treasures obtained, then they could accomplish beautiful things.

Lexical know ledge Practical know ledge

Diagram 4 Lexical and practical knowledge growth in a teacher’s career according to Tina