Teaching outdoor and adventure activities: an investigation of a primary school physical education professional development p

Teachers’ interviews.
The semi structured focus group interview was chosen 
for its flexibility as a data gathering technique in the school setting and to accommodate 
the time available. Focus group interviewing capitalises on group dynamics and 
increases levels of focus and depth (Fontana & Frey, 1994). Group interviews should 
be used when: (a) group interaction stimulates richer responses, (b) new insights are 
possible, (c) groups pressure challenges exist, (d) discussion will illuminate conflicting 
opinions, (e) subject matter is not so sensitive to withhold information, and (f) a 
meaningful topic guide can be established (Morgan & Krueger, 1998). This technique 
is used to obtain insights to target audiences’ perceptions, beliefs, and language. Focus 
group interviews were useful in this context as all 27 / 28 teachers (year 1 and 2 

---

96 
respectively), were to be interviewed. It is recommended that most focus groups should 
consist of 6-8 people but this is dependent on the objectives of the research (Merton, 
Fiske & Kendall, 1990). In the case of this study the groups were organized so that 
each group contained the teachers from a particular class level, three or four teachers, 
depending on the class. As the teachers work together in class groups to plan and 
implement the curriculum in the various subject areas, the researcher deemed that if any 
discussion or interviews were to take place then this was best done in those groupings.
These group interviews would have the advantage in that they would produce rich data 
that were cumulative, they aided recall and the format was flexible. The interviews 
were facilitated by the Principal whereby he took class assemblies, allowing the class 
teachers free time in which to take part in the interviews. The interviews took place in 
the school staffroom and lasted on average an hour. As Junior and Senior Infant 
teachers were not involved in class assemblies, their interviews took place at times 
convenient to all teachers. Junior and senior infants’ school day is an hour shorter than 
other classes and teachers generally chose this hour in which to carry out their 
interviews. 
Glesne and Peshkin (1992) highlight that group interviews are useful in that 
some people need company to be encouraged to talk. In a non-threatening environment 
respondents can make disclosures safely and attitudes and perceptions are developed 
through interaction with other people. The researcher felt that the topic of this study 
lent itself to a discussion within a small group format and Denzin and Lincoln (1994) 
point out that this group would thus be termed a ‘focus group’ in that they would be 
discussing specific issues about teaching physical education. The focus-group 
questioning lent itself to the format of the semi-structured interview which involved a 
specific approach and technique of questioning whilst maintaining aspects of what 
Spradley (1979) calls 
‘friendly conversation’. 
Once the teachers agreed to be interviewed, part of the preparation was to 
outline the nature and scope of the focus group interview to them. Cohen and colleagues 
(2000), highlight that researchers will more readily gain permission and support if they 
discuss their proposed plans in an informed, open and frank manner. While it was 
advantageous that I was acquainted with the interviewees in terms of access, I was 
mindful of the danger of bias creeping into the interviews. Given that these interviewees 
had some prior knowledge of my views and my role as a lecturer in pre-service 
education in the area of physical education, I had to be aware that this could affect the 

---

97 
responses given. Borg (1981) highlights that response effects such as the eagerness of 
the interviewee to please the interviewer or the tendency of the interviewer to search for 
answers that confirm his/her preconceived notions should be acknowledged. There is 
an obligation for the researcher to help the interviewee feel protected and comfortable 
during and after the interview. In this study the researcher let the interviewee dictate 
where the interview should happen and also if any questions were posed by the 
interviewee, the researcher would answer the questions. In some cases to make the 
interviewee feel at ease when they made a revelation, the researcher exposed what she 
felt in turn, this is a practice espoused by Harrison and Morton (2001). As Aston (2001) 
put it, ‘I believe that a certain amount of disclosure is essential. It facilitates a sense of 
trust and mutuality and it increases the comfort level of the narrator’ (p. 147). 
The focus groups with the teachers took place at phase one of the study and 
again pre and post phase three and four. 
Phase 1 – Teacher focus groups (November 2006).
These focus groups were 
carried out following analysis of the questionnaires to teachers and a period of 
observation, to elaborate on some of the findings of the questionnaire and the 
observations. Following questionnaire analysis and discussion with the teacher 
responsible for physical education, it was decided that the teachers would embark on a 
unit of work in Outdoor and Adventure Activities. The following is a brief summary of 
the topics contained in the interview schedule (Appendix Gi): 
Knowledge of O&AA 
Previous teaching of O&AA 
Previous professional development (ITE, national in-service or other 
courses) in O&AA 
Type of support required 
When/where support could be provided 
Teachers familiarity with resource materials for teaching physical 
education (Primary Schools' Sports Initiative, 2006) 
Integration and O&AA
 Phase 3 – Teacher focus groups (March 2007).
The focus groups with the 
teachers took place in the staff room, within two weeks of completion of the unit of 
work. This timeframe was necessary in order for the Principal to facilitate the teachers’ 

---

98 
absence from class as all focus groups took place during school time. The focus group 
schedule consisted of questions covering the following topics: 
Which methods of support were the most/least helpful? 
Which teaching methodologies were the most helpful/useful? 
Suitability of resources provided 
Conception of physical education 
Changes in competence and confidence levels
Knowledge of children’s perspectives of O&AA 
What improvements could be made to the PDP? 
Is support still required? 
Any contextual changes that could be made to support your teaching? 
Any other comments? (Appendix Gii) 
 Phase 4 – Teacher focus groups (October 2007 and November 2007).
The 
focus groups with the teachers took place in the staff room, prior to (Appendix Giii) and 
within two weeks of completion of the unit of work (Appendix Giv). This timeframe 
was necessary in order for the Principal to facilitate the teachers’ absence from class as 
all focus groups took place during school time. The focus group schedules consisted of 
questions covering the following topics, some of which were repeated, in order to allow 
comparisons to be made over time: 
Pre teaching O&AA 
Content knowledge
Pedagogical content knowledge 
Benefits of inclusion of O&AA in physical education programme to 
children
Difficulties encountered when teaching 
Conceptualisation of physical education 
Changes in competence and confidence levels
Knowledge of children’s perspectives of O&AA 
Support required/improved 
Collaboration 

---

99 
Post teaching O&AA 
Content knowledge and change 
Pedagogical content knowledge and change 
Difficulties encountered when teaching 
Re-conceptualisation of physical education 
Continued changes in competence and confidence levels
Knowledge of children’s perspectives of O&AA 
Further support 
Personal barriers to teaching O&AA