Conor O'Reilly is in the fourth year of his Doctor of Education (EdD) in University of Glasgow. His research is focusing on the lived experiences of Chinese international students in Ireland and will involve a longitudal study of students developing outlooks as they study in Irish Higher education institutes. In addition, he has worked in many roles teaching English as foreign language or for academic purposes. In this post, he reflects on his experience shifting from face-to-face to online data collection, complete with thoughts on software, connecting with participants, and making the most of your space. 

A few long weeks back, I was finally granted permission to carry out data collection for my doctoral research project on the developing outlooks of International students in Ireland. After plodding through delay upon delay, I could finally reach out to my contacts who had pledged support sourcing participants, and before long I succeeded in recruiting suitable people. The date of the first interview was March 4. On March 12, the Irish government announced all educational institutes would shut for two weeks to attempt to curb the spread of Covid-19, and I had yet to complete all my data collection.  

For the extent of my doctorate, I have been based in Dublin in Ireland, where I work and live with my young family. As an EdD student, I am used to working remotely, and I have never had to rely on much institutional support from the university for my study or research. Much of the EdD programme has focused on students using their own professional expertise as a guide. It’s a different experience to other research students, but occasional trips to Glasgow have kept my studies focused, while work has kept me connected to international students in Irish higher education. 

I’ve taught students from these backgrounds for many years. When I first started working with international students as research subjects, I was always aware of their mobility and resourcefulness. I felt from the beginning that there was a chance that my participants’ locations would be unpredictable, and so I prepared for this when I completed my ethical approval forms: face-to-face and telephone interviews were treated the same, the option to move to online communication was included, permission forms did not specify the type of interview (allowing for moving from face-to-face to online interviews), and no matter the interview method, only audio could be kept. 

I was fortunate that I had only three more people left to interview at the time the government closed all educational institutions in Ireland. One participant had already asked if I would object if she wore a face mask due to the heightened risk of infection. I was quick to respond and enquire about her willingness to take the interview online, and she raised no objections. I reviewed the ethical approval forms and consulted with my supervisor who saw no issues, and I was encouraged to continue collecting data. I promptly contacted all my remaining participants, and all gratefully accepted the proposal to move the interviews online. As with other interviews, I made appointments, forwarded necessary documents, and reassured the candidates about how data would be managed. Zoom, the platform I used, allows for simple recording of meetings/interviews, and it saves both an audio and video file. The video could be safely destroyed, and the audio kept, to stay in line with participants’ consent. 

The only complication I encountered was a technological one. Frequently, the signal dropped, and the screen froze. It may have been because of my own home’s poor wifi setup or the participants’ wifi. This is a straightforward enough issue, and if you can move to better place or connect directly to the internet by ethernet cable, I would recommend doing so. Additionally, while your own internet connection could be fine, you also need to consider the participants’ internet quality, and this may be less flexible.   

When it comes to connection through video, I feel that I benefited greatly from my subject group and my research topic. International students are used to living away from home and communicating by video is the best way to keep in touch with the folks back home. They were quite familiar with the technology and the experience of communicating in detail on personal issues through a computer monitor. I overcame issues relating to building rapport by first communicating clearly with the participants about the focus and topics in the research. Additionally, I felt that the participants were genuinely interested in being involved, as the issues related to their own experiences as students in Ireland.  

This isn’t always the same for everyone, and many will need to take extra steps to help participants feel more comfortable in the online space. Where a face-to-face participant was concerned about the interview process, I would try to meet and talk to them so they can get to know me a little and feel more comfortable. If a participant is not certain, I would offer the same reassurances for distance communication. A phone call is simple and familiar to all, but in this case, it may benefit to meet the participant online beforehand. If they’re unfamiliar with video calling or uncomfortable in general, showing your own surroundings and feelings while adhering to social distancing could give participants reassurances. I suppose one of the advantages of video calling is that participants can go to a room or space they feel most comfortable in (if they have internet access there of course). This is something I would encourage. These steps may require more than one call, but I think it’s important to have participants willing and confident to take part in the interview, so extra steps may need to be taken to successfully achieve this.  

Likewise, if you are nervous, it would be a good idea to practice a few times with people you know to get comfortable working with interviewing through a camera.  

I hope that reading about my experience will be helpful to other researchers currently feeling a little daunted by this process. I felt a tremendous sense of relief following the first interview, and after that I could relax a bit and concentrate more on the job at hand. In the long term, I am concerned about the direction my research will take as students aren’t studying here at the moment. For now, I am satisfied with the result of my first attempt at data collection in person and online, and I am confident I have the skills to pursue this research in the future.  

Bonus Thoughts: 

• I chose to use Zoom for my data collection, although Skype would have been just as suitable, because UofG sees both as acceptable. I was finding it difficult to work out how to record using Skype, while Zoom had a clear ‘record meeting’ icon at the bottom of the screen. For me, it was also easier to set and send invitations to participants with Zoom over Skype. Perhaps if others have more experience with Skype, they may prefer to use it, but I was happy with my decision in the end. As UofG provides Zoom with the full extent of its resources and functionality, I believe this may have made things easier during the interview process. 

• Unfortunately, I could not carry out the interview anywhere else but my study space at home, which can be loud when my kids are at home. You can buy noise cancelling microphones or headphones, but I just muted the microphone when the candidate was speaking which seemed to suffice. It does remove some of the interaction, as your participant can’t hear any encouragement or agreement as they talk. I’m also a bit clumsy and kept forgetting unmute the microphone, which is something to be wary of. Fortunately, my participants weren’t bothered by the noise so much and understood that we were all working in unfamiliar circumstances.