Use of semi-structured and structured focus groups to assess accuracy of recruitment materials

Journal of College Admission, Summer 2000 by Bromley, Patricia, Fischer, Joan

DEMONSTRATING INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY:

Abstract

Focus groups were conducted with 74 incoming freshmen, transfer students, and nontraditional students at a small, midwestern university.The groups examined students' perceptions of the accuracy of the university's recruitment materials.The study compared the efficacy of a new format (a structured approach) to the usual semi-structured approach.The two approaches elicited comparable information, however, the structured approach led to greater involvement by quiet members, and also kept the group on task to a greater degree than did the semi-structured approach.

Introduction

In the business of higher education, students are the primary consumers, education is the primary product, and pormotional materials are the initial sales materials. As consumers, students have certain rights, including the right to accuracy in recruitment materials (Burdick 1986). Inaccurate or misleading materials can cause students to "buy" programs that do not meet their needs. But how can an institution determine if materials cause students to feel misled?

As Burdick (1986) pointed out, "...if you are interested in finding out what students think about your catalog, or viewbook, or search materials, you should ask them. You don't need George Gallup or Louis Harris. Your students will tell you what they think." Burdick advocated developing a short set of questions regarding publications and then gathering a group of students to examine and discuss the publications. In short, he recommended a focus group.

A focus group is a group interview used to elicit the feelings and opinions of small groups of participants concerning some product or problem (Aubel 1994; Basch 1987). Originally within the realm of marketers and manufacturers, such groups were first conducted in the 1920s, came into greater use in the 1950s (Basch 1987), and were discovered by researchers outside the business arena in the 1980s and 1990s (Aubel 1994). Recently, they have been found useful for assessing preferences in academic and educational contexts (Basch 1987; Flores and Alonso 1995; Bers and Smith 1988; Eggleston 1988; McMillan 1989; Mutha, Takayama and O'Neil 1997; O'Connor 1994; Virginia State Council of Higher Education, 1991 ).

Often, focus groups are used in exploratory research, when little is known about a topic (Basch 1987; Byers 1991; Flores and Alonso 1995). They help researchers gain insights and ideas regarding a relatively unexplored area of experience, or provide information leading to the development of a quantitative survey (Basch 1987; Flores and Alonso 1995; Urban 1990).

Focus groups take a qualitative approach to research, which is useful in a variety of ways. First, when a range of opinions (as opposed to a quantification of the strength of opinions held) regarding a topic is desired, focus groups can be very helpful because they elicit more in-depth information than a paper and pencil survey (Basch 1987). The relaxed atmosphere and mutual reinforcement of shared experience allow for rich data to emerge (Flores and Alonso 1995).

According to Flores and Alonso (1995):

The dialogue activates participants' memories and experiences, confronts points of view, allows participants to be conscious of latent opinions, obliges them to question themes ignored until that moment, and involves looking for arguments to support an unreasoned perception or feeling. The produced data are real because the participants reciprocally influence one another in the same way as happens in real life.

Interactions within the group will not only elicit in-depth information, they produce a wider range of ideas than do individual interviews (Bers and Smith 1988). After warming up, participants usually become eager to talk, and the group interaction facilitates information gathering, rather than inhibiting it (Bers and Smith 1988). The interactions within the ,group may have the synergistic effect of providing insight beyond the questions asked (Seal, Bogart and Ehrhardt 1998).

Researchers have been concerned that this group dynamic might produce distorted information, compared to that elicited by surveys or individual interviews. This does not appear to be true. McMillan (1989), in a study comparing focus group with survey data, found the focus groups to be more informative than the survey method. Seal, Bogart, and Ehrhardt (1998) found focus group findings similar to data obtained in individual interviews.

Focus group research has other advantages. The groups produce a large amount of information in a short amount of time and are enjoyable for participants (Bers & Smith, 1988; Urban 1990). For college campuses, because facilities and personnel are already available, they may be easier and less expensive to conduct than quantitative surveys (Urban 1990) and take less time than individual interviews (Byers 1991 ). In contrast to questionnaire studies, where the researcher's choice of items may be biased, and the participant may not elaborate on answers or dispute questions, focus groups allow for greater input by the respondent. Thus, they may be less contaminated by the researcher's previous conceptions than is questionnaire research (Flores and Alonso 1995).