IB Journal Journal of of Teaching TeachingPractice Practice IB

Special series: Research tools for practitioners

Focus groups are by far and away one of the most versatile and valuable data collection methods in a practitioner researchers toolkit. They can be used to engage parents in school planning, undertaken with fellow teachers to assess curriculum needs, and conducted with learners to obtain student insights on programme outcomes. However, the sheer ubiquity of focus groups has led to misunderstandings regarding what focus groups are and how they should be carried out. This article, a first in an occasional series examining research methods, provides a cooks tour of focus groups, with a particular focus on good practices that help to ensure this multipurpose group method provides valuable contributions to education practitioner research.

Focus groups: A practical tool for practitioner research

BRaDLEY ShRIMPtON

A shORt hIstORY Of fOCUs GROUPs

Celebrated by some for generating powerful insights (Stewart, Shamdasani & Rook, 2007, p. 160), yet derided by others as a second rate polling tool for tea leaf reading politicians (former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating, 2007), the focus group has a long history that can be traced back to World War II. During the war years, the preeminent social scientist, Robert K. Merton, developed an experimental open-ended group technique as part of his research for the US War Department exploring citizen and soldier responses to radio broadcasts and army morale films (Liamputtong, 2011, p. 9). Interestingly, this ground-breaking step of eschewing closed-ended surveys in favour of obtaining participant responses in their own words was promptly ignored by the social sciences, including education, and this remained the case for nearly 30 years.1 Nonetheless, Mertons Focused Interview (Merton, Fiske & Kendall, 1956) created the blueprint for what has become one of the worlds most widely known qualitative data collection techniques.

FOCUs GROUPs IN a NUtshELL

So what are focus groups? For a start, as noted by Krueger and Casey, a focus group isnt just getting a bunch of people together to talk (2009, p. 2). Focus groups are a special type of group where participants are encouraged to interact with each other in a tolerant environment where thoughts, impressions and experiences on a topic of interest are shared among the group (Barbour, 2007; Krueger & Casey, 2009). Focus groups are not undertaken to achieve consensus, for which other methods such as the Delphi Group and Nominal Group techniques can be used. Nor are they a platform for vocal participants to dominate with their views. Indeed, focus groups are collective conversations where the primary aim is to describe and understand meanings and interpretations of a select group of people to gain an understanding of a specific issue from the perspective of the participants of the group (Liamputtong, 2011, p. 3). Unlike quantitative approaches, focus groups not only capture the range of views within a group, they can also be used to reveal the reasons un-

Unlike quantitative approaches, focus groups not only capture the range of views within a group, they can also be used to reveal the reasons underpinning beliefs held by group members.
IB Journal of Teaching Practice, Volume 1, Issue 2 1

IB Journal Journal of of Teaching TeachingPractice Practice IB

derpinning beliefs held by group members. Moreover, focus groups can be used to document how group members respond to each others perspectives and beliefs (Bryman, 2012, p. 473). Drawing on a range of authors, Box 1 lists a number of defining characteristics of focus groups.
Box 1: Defining features of focus groups

Special series: Research tools for practitioners

Another core element of planning is recruitment. As a general rule, focus groups work well when conducted with 610 people (Patton, 2002); although for less complex topics, up to 12 participants can also be considered. With highly in-depth and sensitive topics a focus group can be run effectively with as few as four people, as this can allow people more time to discuss ideas. Regardless of focus group size, a general tip is to over-recruit by one or two participants (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2011). With the best of intentions people will promise to attend, but for good reasons and bad ones will be unable to on the day. Recruitment should target people who have something valuable to say on the topic to be addressed (Horrocks & King, 2010). Recruiting individuals for the sake of being inclusive or including people that may unduly sway conversations is often best avoided.

Focus groups are:

Focus groups are not:

undertaken with small groups generalizable: data is generated from small samplesand of people: ideally, they have so is not necessarily reprebetween 6 and no more than sentative of broader popula12 participants tions about interaction: with this method interaction is key to individual: a moderator facilitates conversation among producing insights into parthe group; they do not ask ticipant beliefs and perspeceach participant the same tives question one by one focused on a specific topic: focus groups can include a anonymous: participants will hear each others views, so the wide range of questions but technique is not appropriate should deal with just one maif confidentiality is important jor topic an interview: focus groups quick and easy: recruitment can be difficult and planning are conducted to generate focus groups is time consumqualitative data; they are not ing. a loose discussion or a brain storming activity. Sources: Barbour & Kitzinger (1998), Hurworth (1996), Kitzinger (1994), Morgan (1988).

Developing questions
Good questions are pivotal to a focus groups success and take time to develop; they should never be hurriedly compiled just prior to a focus group session. When composing questions it is important to consider the logical order of questionsthat is, each question should build on the question that precedes it. For instance, the question list featured in Box 2 asks participants first to provide general background information on their use of interactive whiteboards before then asking questions focusing on strengths and weaknesses of an interactive whiteboard training programme, and then finally it requests that respondents offer suggestions for possible programme improvements. According to Hurworth (1996), this triangular structure of working initially with general opening questions that warm participants up and encourage thinking about a topic, before proceeding to more focused transition questions that in turn build to a small number of key questions can be a highly efficient and effective questioning strategy.

DOING fOCUs GROUPs, stEP bY stEP

Planning
Although easily overlooked, as Gibbs (1997) points out, good focus groups require considerable planning. In terms of logistics, researchers need to consider the venue for the focus group carefully. For example, the room where a focus group will be held should be quiet, away from noisy distractions (so not near a student play area), and be as neutral as possible so that participants feel confident to talk freely (Fern, 2001). Ensuring that a room does not contain materials that may negatively influence discussion, such as certain posters, can also be important.
IB Journal of Teaching Practice, Volume 1, Issue 2 2

IB Journal Journal of of Teaching TeachingPractice Practice IB

Box 2: Focus group questioning route to improve a school interactive whiteboard training programme

Special series: Research tools for practitioners

a question route should be piloted (tested) with a group of people to see if questions are likely to generate the type of information that a study requires (Hennink, Hutter & Bailey, 2011). At the very least, having a colleague review questions to make certain they are coherent is important. Finally, as a general guide, a one-hour focus group can have as few as four questions, but can rarely accommodate more than 810 questions. With too many questions the time available for participants to interact and discuss ideas fully becomes limited, and the moderator may struggle to cover all questions.

Introductions
Hi Im Shaun, and I will be facilitating the focus group about the schools interactive whiteboard training programme. To begin with, lets go around the table and have each person say in a sentence or two which year levels and subjects you teach using an interactive whiteboard. Thanks for that. From now on there is no need to take turns, you can feel free to answer questions that I pose to the group when you feel ready to.

Moderating focus groups

The person who conducts the focus group session is commonly known as the moderator. An important aspect of the role for practitioner researchers to be aware of is that moderating begins the moment participants present themselves at the focus group venue. Krueger (1997) explains that moderators need good communication skills, a friendly manner, an openness to new ideas and strong listening skills. From the earliest stages of a focus group a moderator puts these attributes to use in building rapport and creating an environment where respondents feel comfortable to express their views and are at ease. In terms of the actual conducting of a focus group, a moderator should begin by reminding participants of the purpose of the focus group, set ground rules requiring participants to respect each others points of view, and explain the format of the session (Horrocks & King, 2010, p. 872873): for example, by briefly describing the major sections of the focus group and noting how long the session will take. In groups where members are unfamiliar with each other, having participants introduce themselves can be an important ice breaker, and wearing name tags so that first names can be used can also help to create a relaxed atmosphere. During the focus group, moderators pose questions from the question route to group members, but moderators should also use techniques such as probing and pauses to encourage discussion (Gibbs, 1997). Pauses allow participants think time before responding to a question, but can also be used to signal to a respondent to continue to talk about an issue. Meanwhile, probes are short follow-up questions such as can you tell me more about that? that are similarly used to elicit further information (Krueger & Casey, 2009). If discussion is being dominated by a single person, or the group seems to be presenting only an official view, then probing techniques such as asking what might be a different way of looking at this? or do others have a different point of view? can be invaluable for opening up focus group talk. Other techniques such as using humour or
3

Opening questions
In what ways have you been using interactive whiteboards in your classrooms? What do you feel are the benefits of using interactive whiteboards? Have you encountered any issues or problems when using interactive whiteboards?

Transition questions
In what ways did you find the training programme helped your use of interactive whiteboards? Were there aspects of the training programme that you felt were unhelpful or needed to be explained further? Were there topics that the training programme did not address that you feel it should have?

Key questions
Imagine the schools interactive whiteboard training can be redesigned totally. What aspects of the current programme would you keep? What new aspects would you introduce? What other changes would you want to see happen? Other important considerations when developing focus group questions are to ensure that questions are short and clear so that they are easy for a moderator to say, and will be quickly understood by participants (Krueger & Casey, 2009). Questions should also stimulate conversation through being openthey should not close down discussion by asking for simple yes/no responses. Whenever possible,

IB Journal of Teaching Practice, Volume 1, Issue 2

IB Journal Journal of of Teaching TeachingPractice Practice IB

Special series: Research tools for practitioners

Box 3: Focus group note-takers

playing devils advocate (such as by presenting alternative points of view to those offered by group members) can also work well if used judiciously. Most importantly, a moderator is there to moderate. The moderator assumes a neutral role where they gently attempt to foster dialogue and group interaction and seek to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to have their say. Moderators do not share their own views on a topic nor judge the views of focus group members. Lastly, at the close of a focus group it is good practice to thank participants for attending the focus group and to explain how any findings might be used. Asking participants to share any last thoughts or comments can also be a worthwhile way of capturing thoughts and ideas that some participants may have stored up and be bursting to say.

Recording focus groups

Given that it is almost impossible to document the fast-flowing conversations of a focus group in writing, it is imperative they be recorded electronically. In years past, this was a perpetual worry for researchers as cassette-based recorders often suffered from a poor battery life and limited audio recording range, and tapes typically had a maximum recording length of 45 minutes per side. Nowadays, low cost Dictaphones feature multi-mode microphone settings, such as conference mode, which are ideal for focus groups and can record many hours of audio with one battery charge. Nonetheless, standard checks of ensuring that a recording machine is operating effectively must be performed prior to a focus group, rather than discovering a depleted battery when playing back a focus group interview. Taking the time to become familiar with equipment also helps to ensure that a researcher knows how to operate a machine correctly (Barbour, 2007, p. 76). Meanwhile, taking an extra recorder can offer a lifeline in situations where one machine breaks down. In addition to recording a focus group electronically, consideration should be given to having a note-taker, whose invaluable role in a focus group is outlined in Box 3.

Unless voices are very distinctive (which is frequently not the case with young people), it can often be difficult to keep track of who said what when listening back to a focus group recording (Bryman, 2012). However, having a note-taker jot down notes during a focus group identifying the major points raised by individual participants can provide this important record and include details of non-verbal interactions that may be pivotal in understanding what people say (Krueger & Casey, 2009). Other useful functions performed by the note-taker are monitoring audio equipment and dealing with latecomers, which free the moderator from these tasks (Liamputtong, 2011, p. 63). Note-takers generally sit to the side of a focus group so as not to distract participants with their writing and do not participate in a focus group. A possible alternative method for fulfilling some of the roles undertaken by note-takers is to video record a focus group session. However, authors such as Barbour (2007) warn that video records can make participants selfconscious, which may shut down conversation and interfere with group dynamics. Additionally, while modern digital video cameras often have excellent image quality, the inbuilt microphones on most cameras are of a lower quality and have a very limited range.

IB Journal of Teaching Practice, Volume 1, Issue 2

IB Journal Journal of of Teaching TeachingPractice Practice IB

Special series: Research tools for practitioners

14).

WhEN tO UsE fOCUs GROUPs, aND whEN NOt tO

Like most data collection techniques, focus groups work best when used in ways that play to a methods strengths. In school settings, practitioner researchers can undertake focus groups with students, teachers, administrators and parents to better understand pressing issues and problem areas, such as bullying or schoolparent communication, and they can also be used to generate ideas for addressing such difficulties (Jayanthi & Nelson, 2002). Focus groups are particularly appropriate for obtaining feedback from school stakeholders on how to change programmes, or to draw on the insights and expertise of different groups when designing new interventions (Litosseliti, 2007), for example, when creating staff professional development programmes. In addition to these exploratory and formative uses, the method is ideal in school contexts for summative purposes, such as learning what recipients believe are the outcomes and impacts attributable to a programme. Lastly, focus groups can also be deployed as a supplementary data source to follow up the results of school surveys, including to obtain rich descriptive data on topics where more in-depth information than static graphs is required (Kreuger & Casey, 2010).2 Meanwhile, advice on when not to use focus groups perhaps not surprisingly reflects a number of the methods limitations (Stewart, Shamdasani & Rook, 2007). For instance, like other interview-based methods, focus groups rely on accurate self-disclosure, yet experience shows there can be considerable differences between what people say and do (Smithson, 2000). As such, in some circumstances, the method is unsuitable for generating highly reliable data on participant actions. Moreover, unlike a questionnaire, the lack of anonymity when attending focus groups in small communities such as schools can mean that participants are less likely to share their true views, particularly on certain sensitive topics, for fear of being judged or sanctioned (Litosseliti, 2007). With this in mind, the method should be replaced with other data collection techniques when confidentiality is important. Significantly, as noted in Box 1, focus group data is not generalizable, and so the prevalence of views and experiences expressed by focus group members may not be shared by others (Morgan, 1996). To produce generalizable data, survey-based approaches using probability methods to establish representative samples are required. Nonetheless, so long as these limitations are understood and acknowledged, focus groups can provide what this well-established group method does bestthat is, gather participant opinions, perceptions, feelings and thinking about issues, programmes and opportunities (Krueger & Casey, 2009, p.

CONCLUsION
This article has provided an outline of the main features of focus groups with the aim of providing a sense of the methods utility to education practitioner research. A strong focus of the article has been to detail the nuts and bolts of doing focus groups, incorporating a range of actions and considerations that can strengthen focus group practice. A message that has hopefully been made clear in the preceding paragraphs is that focus groups are not haphazard exercises, but rather require systematic planning to be carried out in a thoughtful and rigorous way. A topic not covered in the article has been how to manage and analyse the data produced by focus groups. However, this will be dealt with in a future article in the IB Journal of Teaching Practice, as part of the occasional series examining research methods.

AbOUt thE aUthOR

Bradley Shrimpton joined the IB as the Global Research Manager (AP) in 2012. Prior to commencing with the IB, Bradley was as an academic coordinator and lecturer at the University of Melbourne where, over a 12-year period, he worked on a wide range of research and evaluation projects. Bradley has received two national awards for his evaluation studies: the 2005 Australasian Evaluation Society Community Development Award and 2007 Australasian Evaluation Society Emerging New Talent Award. He has been the author and co-author of over 40 refereed articles, book chapters and major reports.

ENDNOtEs
1

The technique was, however, adopted with great enthusiasm by marketing and advertising researchers (Puchta & Potter, 2006). An excellent discussion of using focus groups in schools can be found in Jayanthi and Nelson (2002).

IB Journal of Teaching Practice, Volume 1, Issue 2

IB Journal Journal of of Teaching TeachingPractice Practice IB

Special series: Research tools for practitioners

Liamputtong, P. (2011). Focus Group Methodology: Principle and Practice. London: Sage. Litosseliti, L. (2007). Using Focus Groups in Research. London: Continuum. Merton, R., Fiske, M., & Kendall, P. (1952). The Focused Interview: A Manual of Problems and Procedures. New York: The Free Press. Morgan, D. L. (1988). The Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

REfERENCEs
Barbour, R. (2007). Doing Focus Groups. London: Sage. Barbour, R., & Kitzinger, J. (1998). Developing Focus Group Research. London: Sage. Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research Methods in Education (7th ed.). London: Routledge. Fern, E. (2001). Advanced focus group research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Gibbs, A. (1997). Focus Groups. Social Research Update, 19 (Winter). Retrieved from http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU19.html Hennink, M., Hutter, I., & Bailey, A. (2011). Qualitative Research Methods. London: Sage. Horrocks, N., & King, N. (2010). Interviews in Qualitative Research. London: Sage. Hurworth, R. (1996). Qualitative Methodology: Common Questions about Running Focus Groups during Evaluations. Evaluation News and Comment, 5 (1), 4849 & 52. Jayanthi, M., & Nelson, J. (2002). Savvy Decision Making: An Administrators Guide to Using Focus Groups in Schools. London: Sage. Jones, T. (2007). Interview with Paul Keating. Lateline. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health, 16 (1), 103121. Krueger, R.A. (1997). Moderating Focus Groups. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Krueger, R.A., & Casey, M. (2009). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Krueger, R.A., & Casey, M. (2010). Focus Group Interviewing. In J. Wholley, H. Hatry, & K. Newcomber (Eds.), Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus Groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129152.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Puchta, C., & Potter, J. (2006). Focus Group Practice. London: Sage. Smithson, J. (2000). Using and analysing focus groups: limitations and possibilities. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3 (2), 103119. Stewart, D. W., Shamdasani, P. N., & Rook, D. W. (2007). Focus groups: Theory and Practice (2nd ed.). Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 20. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

IB Journal of Teaching Practice, Volume 1, Issue 2