Introduction

Researchers must be seen to approach data collection from the perspective of rigor, validity and criticality as was recommended by Ravitch & Carl, thus datacollection process must be treated as cyclical, emergent, recursive and iterative rather than a one-off event. It is important that researchers base their data collectionprocesses on thoughtful and reflexivity manner (Ravitch & Carl, 2016, p. 115). Ravitch & Carl (2016) indicated that, "the skilled questioner and attentive listener know how to enter into another's experience" (p. 145).

Data Collection Methods

Data or information collection in any research is key. In order to obtain an effective responses to from interviewees to address the research question(s), the interviewer will need to design his/her research interview process so as to make it potent. According to Ravitch & Carl (2016), data collection methods includeinterviews, observation and field-notes, focus groups, a review of documents and archival data, questionnaires, and participatory methods of data collection (p. 145).

Interview method: This is one of the widely used data collection methods by researchers. Interviewing is a social interaction that involve the interviewer and interviewee sharing in the construction of a story and its meanings (Holstein & Gubrium, 1995. Cited in Ravitch & Carl 2016, p. 146). Interviewing is an art with the intent of inviting the participant to provide as much information as possible for a study (Walden University, 2016). A qualitative interview is a conversations in which a researcher gently guides a conversational partner in an extended discussion; the researcher elicits depth and detail about the research topic by following up on answers given by the interviewee during the discussion" (Rubin & Rubin, 2012).

A strong and effective interview strategies not only engage the interviewee, but also enable the interviewee to provide clear and useful information (Walden University, 2016). For instance, in using the interviewing method, I was able to explain to my respondents the main objective of my research and also addressed the grey areas of the questions. Using open-ended questions, I was able to tap from the vast experience and knowledge of some of the respondents who provided a broader and in-depth information towards my research objectives.

However this method of data collection is not devoid of limitations; from my own personal experience, I observed that some of the respondents presented a distorted or "formalistic" responses in an attempt to impress me. Hence for me to address the imbalance, I was mindful of not using my body language to intimate coerce the respondents. Nonetheless, pretesting the interviewing method will enable the researcher to fine-tune the interviewing process and also ask relevant questions "as new information" emerges during the main interview.

Observation/Fieldnotes: Observation and fieldnotes is an important qualitative method because it allows for the researcher to see and record firsthand the activities in which research participants are engaged in (Ravitch & Carl 2016). It explores and describes the mediating contexts on behavior, attitudes, beliefs, and interactions, including organizational, relational, and cultural knowledge; it is interpretive and naturalistic approaches to understanding people and activities in their multiple and intersecting contexts (p. 160).

The strengths of observation and fieldnotes are central to the following (Ravitch & Carl 2016, p. 161):

When combined with other data collection methods, can produce or serve to enhance the validity of the information so collected.

Observation and fieldnotes can be flexible and exploratory.

Reviewing your fieldnotes over time can allow for the building of insight into the roles, contexts, and realities of the research setting and people within it over time.

However in spite of its merits, observation and fieldnotes as a data collection method, is without limitations (Ravitch & Carl 2016, p. 161).

These include:

The issues of reliability and transferability could be compromised since observational sample of the individuals may not be representative of the target population and/or the behaviors observed may not be representative.

Since observation is interpretive and thus inferential, it can reflect researcher biases and assumptions.

Again through the Issues of reactivity, the researcher can affects the behaviors and processes observed in the research as a result of being there can impact the observations of respondents. Reactivity denote a situation where individuals shift or change their actions through direct observation rather than being natural and/or authentic.

Focus groups: Traditionally, focus group research is "a way of collecting qualitative data, which-essentially involves engaging a small number of people in an informal group discussion(s) ‘focused' around a particular topic or set of issues." Focus group data can arise from one of the following three types: individual data, group data, and/or group interaction data (Onwuegbuzie et al. 2009). Focus group theorists disagree as to the most appropriate unit of analysis for focus group data to analyze (i.e., individual, group, or interaction).

This method of data collection (focus groups) draw its strength from the synergy that can be generated from groupthink, which is when an individual introduces a topic and the rest of the group focuses on this topic and ultimately generates a group understanding (Ravitch & Carl 2016, p. 167). Focus groups can be engage alongside with interviewing method of data collection to generate more useful and appropriate information.

Despite the widespread use of focus groups in the social and behavioral sciences and the number of books and articles devoted to this methodology, it is surprising that few explicit guidelines exist on how to analyze focus group data in social science research (Onwuegbuzie et al. 2009).

Aligning my choice of data collection with my research questions: Drawing my experience from the Major Assignment 1, my stake for the data collection methods will be interviewing through focus groups. The "groups" can build on and create ideas as a collective that yields robust and relationally grounded data. Groupthink is a common aspect of focus groups, and if you are focusing on individuals' unique and specific experiences, focus groups may not be the right method. A major attractive force of focus groups is that it allow participants to comment in relation to each other's thoughts, experiences, and responses to specific questions and therefore generate emergent topics for group inquiry and discussion that go beyond responses to the questions on the instrument (Ravitch & Carl 2016, p. 167).

Conclusion

Considering the complexity and the nature of the ecosystem from which researchers obtain information, it may be appropriate in some instances, for researchers to engage a hybrid of the data collection methods (such as asking for stories during and interviewing).

References

Laureate Education (Producer). (2016). Doctoral research: Interviewing techniques, part one [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Dickinson, W. B, Leech, N. L., and Zoran, A. G. (2009). A qualitative framework for collecting and analyzing data in focus group research.International Journal of Qualitative Methods and International Institute for Qualitative Methodology. (pp. 1-21).

Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.