Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
Rapid appraisal,FGD,FGI,IDI
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Rapid appraisal,FGD,FGI,IDI

  • 815 views
Published

 

Published in Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
815
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
22
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • . Instead, a team of individuals with contrasting expertise can develop an understanding of a system by synthesizing information from several sources: prior research and reports, direct observation, and semi-structured interviews. The goals are to grasp an insider’s perspective on the system and to understand it as a whole, rather than to come up with a statistical description of its constituent units. This methodology has also been labeled as Participatory Rural Appraisal and/or Rapid Rural Appraisal (Sweetser, and see also Thomas-Slayter, 1995).
  • The rapid appraisal research methodology rests on three basic principles: 1. Engages in a use of systems perspectives. The elements of the system cannot necessarily be identified in advance, nor can decisions be made in advance as to which of the elements of the system are most important for understanding a given situation. Understanding is gained only when the researcher listens carefully to what interviewees mention (Beebe, 1995). 2. The second principle is the use of triangulation. This term, originating with navigation, refers to the systematic combination of observations made by various research team members coming from different backgrounds or disciplines. Rapid appraisal practitioners must triangulate methods of data collection, sources of information, and researcher’s observations (Beebe, 1995). 3. The third basic principle of rapid appraisal is iterative data collection and analysis. Researchers spend time in interaction, discussions, meetings, and contemplation sometimes including not only the appraisal team but also the client/partners (Beebe, 1995). For rapid rural to be scientifically effective, Christopher Gibbs, an evaluation officer for the World Bank, maintains that the researcher must take four actions in order to preserve the integrity and validity of rapid-rural studies. These include: 1. Investigators should have a sound conceptual framework for the investigation before the start of the project. 2. A variety of data collections should be employed. 3. Information gained through one rapid appraisal exercise should be crosschecked with another (triangulation). 4. Investigators must maintain high standards of self-criticism. (Gibbs, 1985). In rapid rural, the time for research is compressed, but generally, the questions are simple and straightforward. Time is allocated in order to ensure team members interact in an iterative learning process (Sweetser). For example, a few years ago, Ohio University Southern received a request from colleagues in Mexico, suggesting a study be made in a small village outside of a major metropolitan area. This village (General Cepeda) seemed to be suffering from high unemployment, exaggerated alcohol abuse in the adult population, higher mental depression rate in the adult population, and a lack of community action or involvement in social issues. The non-profit client had some research monies to invest, but lacked the expertise in the qualitative side of research techniques in order to mount a proper social sciences study. In a collaborative effort, Ohio University linked with the Institute of Technology of Monterrey (ITESM), Saltillo Campus, to organize and perform a successful study in the small village. (Jarrett & Lucas, 2003). These problems surfaced, however, in an urban setting. Rapid appraisal was designed especially for land law and rural development (Dunn, Beebe, Chambers, Sweetser). In order to further demonstrate that RRA functions as a more narrow research methodology and better suits rural, land development work, Ann Sweetser, a longtime advocate of participatory research projects, maintains that: “Rapid Appraisal is a form of qualitative research derived from participant observation methodology of socio-cultural anthropology. It is used for preliminary design and evaluation of applied activities. RA is fast and flexible but rigorous. It is grounded in recognition that all dimensions of a local system (be it an irrigation system or a political system) cannot be identified in advance, and that attempts to do so reflect primarily the outsider’s culture. Instead, a team of individuals with contrasting expertise can develop an understanding of a system by synthesizing information from several sources: prior research and reports, direct observation, and semi-structured interviews. The goals are to grasp an insider’s perspective on the system and to understand it as a whole, rather than to come up with a statistical description of its constituent units. This methodology has also been labeled as Participatory Rural Appraisal and/or Rapid Rural Appraisal (Sweetser, and see also Thomas-Slayter, 1995). The question remains, however, what if the questions are broader and uniquely fitted for the general population instead of community leaders, land development customers, or key leader informants? What if the research target area includes community neighborhoods or urban areas? What if undergraduate students seek training in the entire process of field research and the scientific process, but have little acquired training in agricultural or development theory? The needs of the students and the research targets demanded a more versatile, flexible research methodology. And, in order to report the circumstances honestly, many academic colleagues from the disciplines of sociology and anthropology expressed their disapproval of using inexperienced undergraduates in their research methodology. These colleagues expressed the feeling that they owned the rapid rural methodology. Because they authored it or founded it, they continued to claim that untrained, undergraduates or others should not practice it.
  • Developing a Community ProfileInformation was gathered to provide a general socialand health profile of the area, including life expectancy,education level, socioeconomic status, occupation, andhealth status. Sources included census data from localcouncils, health and well-being profile constituencydata from National Health Services and incident andmortality cancer data from Information ServicesDivision (National Health Services Scotland, 2007).Identifying and Interviewing Key InformantsUp to ten key informants were identified in eacharea, usually including the lead cancer clinician, politicalrepresentatives (members of Parliament and theScottish Parliament, specialist cancer nurses; localhealth professionals (general practitioner, district nurse,community nurses), and local social care/communityworkers. A “snowballing” procedure was also used toidentify less public but equally key members of thecommunity by asking both key informants and peopleparticipating in the focus groups (MacDougall &Fudge, 2001).Holding Open StallsOpen stalls were held at the hub of each community(shopping center, library, and so forth), as identified byfocus groups and key informants, asking the generalpublic questions about their views of cancer and cancercare.Focus GroupsTwenty nine focus groups were held, with an averageof 4 to 8 participants each. Participants were recruitedthrough community groups and social networks in eacharea, such as schools, sheltered housing, and groupscomprising local businessmen. Questions coveredunderstandings and views of cancer and cancer care,with interpreters used to communicate with participantswhose first language was not English, if necessary.Exit QuestionnairesA short questionnaire was completed by participantsto capture demographic information to ensure asufficient demographic and socioeconomic spread ofparticipants. They also served to identify whether thosewho took part had been directly or indirectly affectedby cancer.Collating and Analysis of DataInitial data was analyzed thematically in a team.Once general themes had been identified, data was analyzedby one researcher and checked by another. Datawere analyzed in stages: (a) each data set was analyzed,(b) data sets were triangulated and analyzed as a wholerapid appraisal for each community, and (c) the datawas analyzed for Scotland as a whole.Feedback to Local CommunityPreliminary results were fed back to participants forcomments and validation in the form of lay summariesand, in some places—on the request of participants—oral presentations.
  • Focus Group DiscussionM. Escalada and K.L. HeongThe focus group discussion (FGD) is a rapid assessment, semi‐structured data gatheringmethod in which a purposively selected set of participants gather to discuss issues and concernsbased on a list of key themes drawn up by the researcher/facilitator (Kumar 1987). Thisqualitative research technique was originally developed to give marketing researchers a betterunderstanding of the data from quantitative consumer surveys. As an indispensable tool formarketing researchers (Krueger 1988), the focus group discussion has become extremelypopular because it provides a fast way to learn from the target audience (Debus 1988; USDepartment of Health and Human Services 1980). Marketing and media studies have shownthat the focus group discussion is a cost‐effective technique for eliciting views and opinions ofprospective clients, customers and end‐users. In agriculture, focus groups have been used toobtain insights into target audience perceptions, needs, problems, beliefs, and reasons forcertain practices.Focus group discussion guideTo keep the session on track while allowing respondents to talk freely and spontaneously,the facilitator uses a discussion guide that lists the main topics or themes to be covered in thesession. It serves as a road map that guides the facilitator in covering the list of topics andkeeping the discussion on track. The number of items in the guide is generally kept to aminimum to leave enough time for in‐depth discussion. It should focus only on relevant researchissues. The sequence of topics in the guide usually moves from general to specific (see Box 1 forsample FGD guide).The following steps are suggested for developing the focus group discussion guide:1. Specify the objectives and information needs of the focus group discussion.ExampleTo understand how extension and plant protection officials make decisions inresponse of pest outbreaks.2. Break down the major topics into discussion points or themes.Examplea) Reporting of pest outbreaksb) Management procedure for dealing with pest outbreaksc) Worries and concerns about the BPH/virus outbreak3. Prepare probe questions.Example1. Let’s talk about reporting of the BPH/virus disease outbreak that hit the MekongDelta recently
  • Unstructured group interview technique where 8 to 12 people are brought together, under the guidance of a trained interviewer, to focus on a specific concept, product, or subject. Advertisers use the focus group during the advertisement development phase as an exploratory marketing tool. When the interview is led by a skilled moderator, the group dynamics will generate ideas and provide insights into consumer reactions and perceptions. The focus group interview requires a great deal of expertise on the part of the moderator, who will introduce the subject and encourage the group to discuss it. Groups are composed of users and potential users of products of all ages and both sexes.
  • Unstructured group interview technique where 8 to 12 people are brought together, under the guidance of a trained interviewer, to focus on a specific concept, product, or subject. Advertisers use the focus group during the advertisement development phase as an exploratory marketing tool. When the interview is led by a skilled moderator, the group dynamics will generate ideas and provide insights into consumer reactions and perceptions. The focus group interview requires a great deal of expertise on the part of the moderator, who will introduce the subject and encourage the group to discuss it. Groups are composed of users and potential users of products of all ages and both sexes.
  • Unstructured group interview technique where 8 to 12 people are brought together, under the guidance of a trained interviewer, to focus on a specific concept, product, or subject. Advertisers use the focus group during the advertisement development phase as an exploratory marketing tool. When the interview is led by a skilled moderator, the group dynamics will generate ideas and provide insights into consumer reactions and perceptions. The focus group interview requires a great deal of expertise on the part of the moderator, who will introduce the subject and encourage the group to discuss it. Groups are composed of users and potential users of products of all ages and both sexes.

Transcript

  • 1. Rapid Appraisal,FGD, FGI, IDI
    BY LORELYN T. DUMAUG
  • 2. RAPID APPRAISAL
    Rapid Appraisal is a form of qualitative research derived from participant observation methodology of socio-cultural anthropology. It is used for preliminary design and evaluation of applied activities.
    (Ann Sweetser)
  • 3. RAPID APPRAISAL
    RA is fast and flexible but rigorous. It is grounded in recognition that all dimensions of a local system (be it an irrigation system or a political system) cannot be identified in advance, and that attempts to do so reflect primarily the outsider’s culture.
  • 4. RAPID APPRAISAL
    RA methods stem from a recognition that “those who make the recommendations and the decisions . . . are often poorly informed about the realities of those living with their decisions”(Cornwall & Guijt, 2004) and are based on the premise that a representative picture of the views, needs, and/or priorities of a local population can be derived from a smaller number of key informants (Ong & Humphries, 1994).
  • 5. RAPID APPRAISAL
    the term “rapid” should not necessarily be taken to imply a “quick and dirty” method lacking in rigor. The inherent triangulation of sources of data and methods of data collection provides opportunities for cross- checking and validating findings throughout (Koelen, Vaandrager, & Colomer, 2001; Rhodes et al, 1999; Tones & Green, 2004).
  • 6. 3 Basic Principles
    Engages in a use of systems perspectives
    Use of Triangulation
    Iterative Data collection and analysis
  • 7. 1ST PRINCIPLE: USE OF SYSTEMS PERSPECTIVES
    The elements of the system cannot necessarily be identified in advance, nor can decisions be made in advance as to which of the elements of the system are most important for understanding a given situation.
    Understanding is gained only when the researcher listens carefully to what interviewees mention (Beebe, 1995).
  • 8. 2ND PRINCIPLE: USE OF TRIANGULATION
    This term, originating with navigation, refers to the systematic combination of observations made by various research team members coming from different backgrounds or disciplines. Rapid appraisal practitioners must triangulate methods of data collection, sources of information, and researcher’s observations (Beebe, 1995).
  • 9. 3RD PRINCIPLE: ITERATIVE DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS
    Researchers spend time in interaction, discussions, meetings, and contemplation sometimes including not only the appraisal team but also the client/partners (Beebe, 1995).
  • 10. 4 ACTIONS NEEDED TO PRESERVE INTEGRITY & VALIDITY
    Investigators should have a sound conceptual framework for the investigation before the start of the project.
    A variety of data collections should be employed.
  • 11. 4 ACTIONS NEEDED TO PRESERVE INTEGRITY & VALIDITY
    3. Information gained through one rapid appraisal exercise should be crosschecked with another (triangulation).
    4. Investigators must maintain high standards of self-criticism. (Gibbs, 1985).
  • 12. Rapid Appraisal Process
    Developing a Community Profile
    Identifying and Interviewing Key Informants
    Holding Open Stalls
    Focus Groups
    Exit Questionnaires
    Collating and Analysis of Data
    Feedback to Local Community
  • 13. Focus Group Discussion(FGD)
  • 14. Focus Group Discussion(FGD)
    The focus group discussion (FGD) is a rapid assessment, semi‐structured data gathering method in which a purposively selected set of participants gather to discuss issues and concerns based on a list of key themes drawn up by the researcher/facilitator (Kumar 1987).
  • 15. Focus group discussion guide
    To keep the session on track while allowing respondents to talk freely and spontaneously, the facilitator uses a discussion guide that lists the main topics or themes to be covered in the session. It serves as a road map that guides the facilitator in covering the list of topics and keeping the discussion on track. The number of items in the guide is generally kept to a minimum to leave enough time for in‐depth discussion.
  • 16. Suggested Steps for Developing FGD discussion guide
    Specify the objectives and information needs of the focus group discussion.
    Break down the major topics into discussion points or themes.
    Prepare probe questions.
    Review the guide and eliminate any irrelevant questions.
  • 17. Asking questions during focus groups
    The quality of questions asked in a focus group can make a large difference in the kind of information obtained.
    - Open‐ended questions are most appropriate at the start of the discussion because they allow participants to answer from different angles.
    - Dichotomous questions are ones that can be answered by a “yes” or “no” or other similar two‐alternative items.
  • 18. How to conduct a focus group discussion?
    familiarity with the discussion topic
    ability to speak the language spoken of the area
    cultural sensitivity, including not acting as a judge, a teacher, does not look down on respondents, not agreeing or disagreeing with what is said,
  • 19. How to conduct a focus group discussion?
    Do not put words in the participants’ mouths.
    genuine interest in people
    sensitivity to men and women
    politeness
    empathy
    respect for participants
  • 20. Steps in conducting the session
    1. After a brief introduction, the purpose and scope of the discussion are explained.
    2. Participants are asked to give their names and short background information about themselves.
    3. The discussion is structured around the key themes using the probe questions prepared in advance.
  • 21. Steps in conducting the session
    4. During the discussion, all participants are given the opportunity to participate.
    5. Use a variety of moderating tactics to facilitate the group.
  • 22. Guidelines in conducting FGD
    1. The FGD is an opportunity for the research team to listen and learn, and not to lecture or provide team members’ interpretation of the local biophysical and social system.
    2. The team members agree on various task assignments including: a) facilitator/interpreter , b) rapporteur, c) logisticsin‐charge.
  • 23. Guidelines in conducting FGD
    3. Each team member must have a copy of the FGD guide. The list of themes to be discussed may be written on the board to serve as guide for FGD participants on the scope and progress of the discussion.
    4. Familiarize yourself with local terminologies/names to avoid misunderstanding of what they say.
  • 24. Guidelines in conducting FGD
    5. Keep an open mind and listen more. Do not push your own agenda.
    6. Avoid questions that yield Yes or No answers.
  • 25. Guidelines in conducting FGD
    7. Avoid leading questions. Examples: Don’t you think that variety X is an excellent variety?
    8. Be sensitive to local norms and customs.
  • 26. Guidelines in conducting FGD
    9. Remember that time is valuable to them. Strive to complete the FGD within the time period that you mentioned to participants.
    10. Don’t forget to thank participants and local leaders after the conduct of the FGD.
  • 27. Logistical arrangements for FGD
    Invitations ‐ Participants are contacted in advance, at least one to two weeks before the session.
    Group composition ‐ The choice of participants depends on the topic of the focus group.
    Transportation ‐ To ensure attendance, transportation is usually arranged for the participants from their residence to the focus group venue.
  • 28. Logistical arrangements for FGD
    Venue ‐ Focus group discussions can be conducted in a place where 8 ‐ 10 persons can be seated and assured of some privacy.
    Seating arrangements ‐ A semicircular seating arrangement facilitates interaction among participants because it allows them to freely see and hear each other.
    Timing ‐ The timing of the meeting should be convenient to all participants.
    Name tags ‐ It is best to remember the names of the participants. Often, a seating arrangement will facilitate identifying each one.
  • 29. Logistical arrangements for FGD
    Recording ‐ A trained rapporteur should capture the discussion in writing.
    Refreshments ‐ When resources permit, serving refreshments after the session is a small gesture of appreciation to the participants for having taken time off their work to participate.
  • 30. Writing the FGD report
    1. Develop a plan for analysis consisting of:
  • Writing the FGD report
    2. Analyze the content of the group discussion by
    • reviewing the notes from the focus group
    • 35. listening again to the cassettes from the session
    • 36. grouping research findings according to key themes
    • 37. identifying the different positions that emerged under each key theme
    • 38. summarizing each of the different positions and assess the extent to which each
    • 39. position was held by participants
    • 40. pulling out verbatim phrases that represent each position.
  • Writing the FGD report
    3. Synthesize the group discussion by:
    • reviewing the notes of each discussion made by the moderator
    • 41. identifying the recurrent ideas that came out during the discussion
    • 42. interpreting these recurrent ideas based upon other findings that emerged in the groups
  • Focus Group Interview
    FGD
  • 43. Focus Group Interview (FGI)
    Unstructured group interview technique where 8 to 12 people are brought together, under the guidance of a trained interviewer, to focus on a specific concept, product, or subject.
  • 44. Focus Group Interview (FGI)
    When the interview is led by a skilled moderator, the group dynamics will generate ideas and provide insights into respondent’s reactions and perceptions.
  • 45. Focus Group Interview (FGI)
    The focus group interview requires a great deal of expertise on the part of the moderator, who will introduce the subject and encourage the group to discuss it.
  • 46. The In-depth Interview
  • 47. In-Depth Interview
    In-depth interviewing is a qualitative research technique that involves conducting intensive individual interviews with a small number of respondents to explore their perspectives on a particular idea, program, or situation.
  • 48. When are In-Depth Interviews Appropriate?
    In-depth interviews are useful when you want detailed information about a person’s thoughts and behaviors or want to explore new issues in depth.
  • 49. When are In-Depth Interviews Appropriate?
    In-depth interviews should be used in place of focus groups if the potential participants may not be included or comfortable talking openly in a group, or when you want to distinguish individual (as opposed to group) opinions about the program. They are often used to refine questions for future surveys of a particular group.
  • 50. What are the Advantages of In-Depth Interviews?
    They provide much more detailed information than what is available through other data collection methods, such as surveys.
    may provide a more relaxed atmosphere in which to collect information—people may feel more comfortable having a conversation with you about their program as opposed to filling out a survey
  • 51. Limitations of In-Depth Interviews?
    Prone to bias
    Can be time-intensive
    Interviewer must be appropriately trained in interviewing techniques
    Not generalizable
  • 52. Process for Conducting In-Depth Interviews:
    Plan
    Develop Instruments
    Train Data Collectors
    Collect Data
    Analyze Data
    Disseminate Findings
  • 53. Potential Sources of Information
    Policy Makers
    Program Participants/Clients
    Project Staff
    Community Members
    Clinic Staff
  • 54. How are In-Depth Interviews Presented?
    Introduction and Justification
    Methodology
    Results
    Conclusion and Recommendations
    Appendices
  • 55. Sources
    http://www.southern.ohiou.edu/folknography/publications/folk_tustor.pdf
    https://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/890/1/Using%20a%20Rapid%20Appraisal%20Approach%20in%20a.pdf
     http://www.answers.com/topic/focus-group-interview#ixzz1ZLfnlyA9
    http://ricehoppers.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/focus-group-discussion.pdf
  • 56. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING!