Making interviews: challenges, risks and evaluation

1. Making interviews: challenges, risks and evaluation Maria Barzinska PhD student New Bulgarian University Centre for European Refugee, Migration and Ethnic Studies Sofia, Bulgaria

2. Content I.Who am I and what my interviews and work look like? II. More precisely about the interviews III. What are the challenges/difficulties? IV. What are the risks? V. Efficiency of the interview type VI. Instead conclusion

3. I.Who am I and what my interviews and work look like? • Maria Barzinska, PhD student at the Centre for European Refugee, Migration and Ethnic Studies of the New Bulgarian University, Sofia, Bulgaria. • Topic of the research: “The Macedonian immigration in Bulgaria after 1989”. More precisely theMacedonian young people, who study in BG – motivation to come and study in BG, integration, plans for the future. • Interviews – the hard, long and difficult way to collect info about the images and self images of the Macedonian group.

4. II. More precisely about the interviews • Qualitative data collection, extended interviews, long conversations with 1 or more respondents • Work before the interview, time, place and direction • “Relax” time and droping the suspicion of the respondents • Problem with recording the interviews • Structure of the interview: • reasons and personal history of the immigration • characteristics of the Macedonian group and in-group communication/ethnocentrism • communication with the Bulgarians/integration, the attitude towards authorities and the way they feel accepted/rejected by the Bulgarian society. • Direction of the interview goes on – the main role of the respondent • Specific points • End of interview

5. III.What are the challenges/difficulties? • suspicions and mistrust MK-BG, vice versa • to convince the respondent that this work is important for him and his group and it will lead to a positive development • the very sensitive Macedonian identity issues • complex history and self-determination, images and self-images, specific bilateral relations BG-MK • to stay distant, analyze the interviews without passion and apart from any kind of state, political party or academic policy • to let them stay absolute anonymous, not to harm the researched groupby giving more info about them than needed/intelligence/ • terrain work takes much time and not less money • to “marry” the info collected with the computer • other /ad hoc situations by every particular interview/

6. Not to become clear info and the true opinion of the respondent Not to succeed to stay distant from their problems/expectations/hard moments in the live in BG To let them being “visible” by mentioning of some personal data or to harm the group /say and publish more than necessary/ To analyze the interviews with unnecessary passion and without the correct dose of scientific thought and methods or according to some kind of state, political party or academic policy toward Macedonian immigration Other /life and work risk/ IV. What are the risks?

7. V. Efficiency of the interview type • Despite all above mentioned, those kind of interviews, based on the personal story, where the interviewed person talks about himself, are the best way to observe, collect, analyze and evaluate the information and the messages from the material. • They give much more ideas and facts needed than the written defined form to fill, they are not restricted to chose only 1 from 6/10 possible answers, they don’t have tight frames to operate in, other

8. VI. Instead conclusion • Knowing and understanding the nations on the Balkans is very delicate, not well researched issue and causes too many, mostly negative emotions • EU common future as possible way – is it possible? • In any case a hard work is needed, it is enormous step ahead to discuss ethnic groups

9. Thank you for the possibility to be among and to communicate with people doing good and valuable steps in this direction with their work. I wish to the project and to everybody lot of success !