Found in (survey) translation: lessons learned while engaging with a wharekura in Southland, New Zealand

ABSTRACT

We liaised with a wharekura (Māori language immersion school) to translate and disseminate an online survey for a group of Māori youth in Southland, New Zealand (NZ). The focus of this article is not results, but the processes of respondent orientation and engagement to more genuinely include Māori in a youth survey. An online survey about transport and well-being was conducted with older teenagers from 12 schools, including the wharekura. After working with wharekura staff and students, the survey was translated from English into te reo Māori using best-practice methods. Steps were taken to safeguard authentic engagement, including how the survey translation was conducted, and how the survey data were shared. This NZ-specific experience adds to the literature about the practice of applying the principle of respondent orientation to the process of translating an existing survey into te reo Māori, demonstrating commitment to some Treaty of Waitangi principles. While this is not a kaupapa Māori research project, it is informed by some kaupapa Māori principles. This may be seen as a limitation of this work; however, we believe there are many positive experiences and lessons to be learned from our approach.

KEYWORDS:

• Youth
• te reo Māori
• respondent orientation
• questionnaire/survey translation

Over 15% of all people living in New Zealand (NZ) are Māori (the indigenous population in NZ) (Statistics New Zealand 2016). Māori are a youthful population when compared to the majority population of NZ Europeans; 33% of Māori are under the age of 15 years (Statistics New Zealand 2013a). The South Island of NZ presents a varied demographic, as the Southland region is comprised of predominantly NZ Europeans, but the region has the largest Māori population (approximately 12%) in the South Island (Statistics New Zealand 2013b).

Among teenagers, transportation is typically considered in the context of risk; it is rarely considered in the context of well-being. This has specific implications for the youthful Māori population, and recent research has begun to address Māori perspectives on urban transport as it relates to well-being (Raerino et al. 2013). Current research suggests that transport choice is in fact related to one’s overall health and well-being (Jones et al. 2012; Reardon and Abdallah 2013; Vella-Brodrick and Stanley 2013; Ward et al. 2015), with regard to the work commute (Guell and Ogilvie 2012; Olsson et al. 2013; de Vos et al. 2015), and active transport among adults and children (Humphreys et al. 2013; Crane et al. 2014; Martin et al. 2014; Ramanathan et al. 2014). However, there has been little work on this topic specifically with older teenagers, who are at an important transition stage as they navigate from childhood to adulthood. This research gap was the focus of a mixed-methods research project in Southland, NZ, which resulted in the unanticipated opportunity to incorporate some kaupapa Māori research principles, via the translation of an online survey about transport and well-being into te reo Māori.

The Treaty of Waitangi, considered the founding document of NZ, was signed in 1840 between Māori and British Crown representatives. After the Second World War, a distinct call for inclusion of Maori philosophies in education and research emerged (Walker et al. 2006). One research implication of the Treaty emphasises the importance of Māori participation in determining research processes for best practices (Kingi 2007; Wyeth et al. 2010). Thus, care needs to be taken to ensure that Māori are able to participate in research that is relevant and beneficial, and consequently, public health research should be meaningful and appropriate for Māori, and conducted in a manner that respects and recognises Māori worldviews (Durie 1985; Health Research Council 2010). A kaupapa Māori approach prescribes that research is undertaken ‘by Māori, for Māori, with Māori’ (Smith 1999; Walker et al. 2006; Mane 2009; Cram 2017). Important aspects of this paradigm include that researchers need to confirm the importance of Māori self-definitions, as well as critically analyse colonial constructions and definitions of Māori in order to communicate effective solutions (Smith 1999; Cram 2017). A primary principle of this approach is tino rangatiratanga – incorporating principles of sovereignty, self-determination, governance, autonomy and independence (Pihama et al. 2002; Walker et al. 2006). Practically speaking, tino rangatiratanga calls for Māori researchers to lead research projects, or for non-Māori researchers to collaborate with Māori participants and stakeholders prior to project inception, and all the way through to dissemination of results and evaluation, as well as the use of te reo Māori (the Māori language) in research (Cram 2017).

This paper describes the collaborative process of developing, translating and distributing an existing survey for a wharekura (Māori language immersion school). The engagement methods and approaches used with a group of young Māori are described, and considerations offered on processes of engagement and translation. Information on the research topic, as well as survey processes, is included to provide context. Reflecting on the current project, Māori participant views were not taken into account during the writing of the translated survey, as advised by the kaupapa Māori approach, as the project was an unanticipated ‘add-on’ to the research. This is a limitation of this work and is presented for deliberation in the Discussion. However, the use of a wholly te reo Māori survey does reflect some aspects of the principle of tino rangatiratanga. It should be stressed that this paper outlines our approach rather than presents results or considers implications of our research findings. The process of translation was a valuable learning experience for this (mainly non-Māori) research team, and our future research and any interventions will now include the principles of kaupapa Māori research, in a continued effort to encourage genuine collaboration, trust and normalisation of te reo Māori translation in the NZ research environment.

Methods

Survey methodology

There are a number of frameworks that extend definitions of well-being beyond just feeling happy to broader concepts of autonomy, self-acceptance and purpose, combined with mental health indicators such as self-esteem and resilience, and values such as honesty and kindness (Olsson et al. 2012). This positive approach to adolescent well-being is in keeping with kaupapa Māori principles (Mane 2009). Research among adolescents has often been framed from a deficient perspective (Hall 1905), and often portrays youth as a ‘problem to be managed’ (Roth and Brooks-Gunn 2003, p. 94). In contrast, the positive youth development (PYD) model (Larson 2000; Bech et al. 2003; Lerner et al. 2005; Phelps et al. 2009; Porter 2010; Guell and Ogilvie 2012; Olsson et al. 2012; Crocetti et al. 2014):

moves beyond the negative, deficit view of youth that dominated developmental science, psychology, education, sociology, public health, and other fields through the twentieth century and towards a view of the strengths of youth and the positive qualities and outcomes we wish youth to develop. (Bowers et al. 2010, p 720)

Thus, the methodology of this project is rooted in the PYD perspective (Lerner et al. 2005; Phelps et al. 2009; Geldhof et al. 2013). The methods of assessing well-being via PYD are based on competence (social, academic, cognitive and vocational); confidence (internal sense of overall positive self-worth and self-efficacy); connection (positive bonds between the individual and peers, family, school and community); character (respect for societal and cultural rules, morality and integrity) and caring (sense of sympathy and empathy) (Larson 2000; Park 2004; Lerner et al. 2005; Phelps et al. 2009; Wayne Francis Charitable Trust 2010; Geldhof et al. 2013; Andrews et al. 2014). The PYD approach is valuable because it focuses on the strengths and positive characteristics of youth.

Preliminary research

It is important that the approach to any research involving Māori participants include collaboration with key organisations, groups and communities (Health Research Council 2010). We report here on the application of the technique of respondent orientation (Gendall 1998) among schools in Southland, NZ. The principle of respondent orientation, much like kaupapa Māori principles, positions the respondent at the centre of the research project; practically speaking, the survey respondent determines what one can do, such as the type of questions you can ask, the concepts you explore and the methodology you can use (Gendall 1998; Gendall et al. 2009; Ward et al. 2016). Within survey research, keeping respondents in mind is paramount for success. Too often, survey tools are created with little thought to the engagement of and distribution to potential respondents. In the context of this research, this problem was overcome by using qualitative tools which were employed to get to know the participants (youth aged 15–19 years old) in Southland, and to inform the writing a survey that targeted them. While time consuming, this approach is the only way to ensure surveys are written appropriately for the target audience.

Our research group (made up of investigators from the disciplines of geography, public health, marketing and Māori health) addressed this research with a mixed-methods approach. The method of photovoice (Wang and Burris 1997) was used to explore transport and well-being, which allowed for individual participants to photograph how they used transport as a daily lived experience, and discuss the photographs they took in group meetings facilitated with open-ended questioning techniques (Strack et al. 2004). As reported elsewhere (Ward et al. 2015), questions were asked to stimulate more detail from the stories, to elicit attitudes and beliefs about transport and related well-being among Southland teenagers (van Manen 1984). Participants contributed questions and comments to each other’s photo discussions, serving to deepen the narratives and the data collected. These group discussions were crucial; as Morrow states, ‘a photograph has no meaning in and of itself, it is the interpretation and explanation that is important’ (Morrow and Richards 1996). The photovoice study provided much-needed context to our subsequent survey-based research and gave valuable insight into our target population. The photovoice project directly informed survey question design, as the survey was not written until after the qualitative portion of the research was completed. A pilot study was then conducted to test its feasibility, prior to broader dissemination to a larger sample (Ward et al. 2016). Māori participants made up 18% and 14% of the photovoice project and pilot study, respectively (Ward et al. 2015, 2016); thus, Māori views were included in preliminary research, albeit in a group setting and not individually. For example, feedback sessions were included in the pilot, and this feedback resulted in direct and specific changes to question content and format. Thus, this preliminary research was of great benefit to the final survey version. Had the survey been written without the preliminary work to inform it, many questions would have been excluded that provided key data, resulting in missed opportunities.

Ethical guidance

Ethical approval for the current study was obtained from the University of Otago Human Ethics Committee (reference numbers 14/062 and 14/163). We also needed to ensure that the research followed the University of Otago Research Consultation with Māori Policy, and the associated process. This included consultation with Ngāi Tahu (the local tribe with authority over the majority of the South Island) via the Ngāi Tahu Research Consultation Committee (University of Otago 2010). This process allowed for incorporation of, and responses to, Māori views and advice about the research topic (Wyeth et al. 2010). The Committee encouraged our collection of ethnicity data and ancestry via the latest NZ census questions (Statistics New Zealand 2017), and considered the research outcomes of transport and well-being to be of importance to Māori health. Suggestions also included seeking advice from Māori researchers and stakeholders, and dissemination of findings to Māori health organisations and communities. During the school recruitment process for this research, both the University of Otago Human Ethics Committee and the Ngāi Tahu Research Consultation Committee were kept up-to-date of any changes that occurred, so that either Committee could ask questions or provide comments at any time.

Survey design, recruitment and distribution

Our survey design, recruitment and distribution details are reported elsewhere (Ward et al. 2016), and full analysis is pending (Ward, McGee, Freeman, Gendall and Cameron, unpublished). Brief details are provided here for context. Finalised questions were included to allow for cross-sectional examination of both physical and mental well-being associated with involvement in activities, connection with family and friends, and access to key destinations.

All of the secondary schools in the Southland region of NZ, including the wharekura, were systematically contacted in order to recruit students for the final survey. First, a letter was sent, followed by an email to schedule a time to meet about the possibility of including the school in the large-scale online survey. A total of 12 secondary schools (of a possible 13) participated in the transport and well-being survey. Two methods of distribution were offered – the ‘in-class’ method (students took the survey online as part of their school day) and the ‘at home’ method (students took the survey online at home on their own time). Personalised invitation emails with a link to the survey were emailed to students. The survey was administered online via the Qualtrics survey tool ( 2014), and participants worked through the survey sections sequentially. The online process included reminder emails, and an incentive scheme, all of which have been shown to increase response rates (Fricker and Rand 2002; Center for Aging in Diverse Communities: Measurements and Methods Core 2007; Heerwegh and Loosveldt 2007; Fan and Zheng 2010; Singer and Cong 2013). All decisions related to survey design were made to allow for the minimisation of measurement errors, the maximisation of the likelihood of collecting quality data, the maximisation of response rate, and the reduction of the cognitive burden put upon both survey respondents and school staff.

Engagement and translation

At the recruitment meeting with staff at the wharekura, the principal initially declined survey participation. Further discussion realised that this was due to the survey language; wharekura staff expressed interest in allowing their students to participate, if the survey was translated into te reo Māori. This opportunity was seized as a welcome addition to the research project. To overcome the survey language barrier, and to ensure our engagement was meaningful for, and beneficial to, the staff and students of the wharekura, and in keeping with Treaty of Waitangi, specifically articles II and III, rangatiratanga (chieftainship) and ōritetanga (equality) (Wyeth et al. 2010), steps were taken to safeguard authentic engagement, including how the survey translation was conducted.

While unable to apply the principles of kaupapa Māori in full, we applied what was possible through respondent orientation principles, as addressed in the preliminary qualitative research projects. After it was agreed that the wharekura would participate, the main researcher (AW) discussed the survey kanohi ki te kanohi (face to face) with staff at the wharekura during two additional hui (meetings), as well as had regular email contact with the pouako (teacher) who was the direct contact person at the school, during the six-month period leading up to survey distribution. During these hui, survey procedure and content were discussed. The wharekura staff expressed interest in the topic of transport and well-being among their students as they reported that most drove to school. At the recommendation of the pouako, a professional approved translator was hired to translate the survey. Also at his suggestion, the survey translation was prepared in the generic Māori dialect, instead of the Southern Māori dialect.

A 2007 report states that ‘a well-translated survey instrument should have semantic equivalence across languages, conceptual equivalence across cultures, and normative equivalence to the source survey’ (McGorry 2000, p. 1). ‘Semantic equivalence’ means that translated questions in a survey should express the same meaning as in the original language; ‘conceptual equivalence’ refers to the fact that the idea being measured remains the same regardless if wording to describe it changes and ‘normative equivalence’ refers to the ability of translated survey questions to address the same social norms as the original version (McGorry 2000). These factors were all considered during the development of this translation. For example, these equivalencies were achieved via regular email discussions as to the meaning and intended outcome of questions between the main researcher, wharekura staff and the translator as the survey translation process progressed.

The simplest form of translation is one-way translation (Marin and Marin 1991). This involves engaging a translator to review the original document, in this case a survey, and translate it into the target language. While this is more cost-effective, it includes no review, and no comparison with the original document. Thus, this method does not address any of the equivalence issues mentioned. In the case of this survey, the method of double translation (also referred to as ‘back-translation’) was used (Marin and Marin 1991). Double translation safeguards correct conversion from one language to another, because during this process more than one person independently reviews the final translation (McGorry 2000). This helped ensure the survey was accurate, as well as in keeping with the spirit of the original version, thereby addressing semantic, conceptual and normative equivalencies.

During the double translation process, the original English version was first translated into te reo Māori by a professional translator, while engaging regularly with the main researcher and wharekura staff, as described. A second bilingual reviewer (the pouako) translated the survey back to English, and compared it with the original survey tool, to check for inconsistencies. Final comparisons and checks for inconsistencies were made, and changes were discussed via cooperative email communications. After the translation to te reo Māori was complete, the survey was then entered into the online Qualtrics survey tool (2014), and the online format was also checked for accuracy and previewed by two bilingual reviewers, one of which was a student, prior to the survey being disseminated to all students. The wharekura opted for the in-class delivery method, as the staff there wanted to use the survey as a language learning tool. The pouako supplied student email addresses, and the survey was consequently disseminated via email and facilitated by teachers during class time.

Discussion and conclusions

The research described here suggests that a translation exercise such as this is feasible, effective and important for both participants and researchers. Our experience in engaging with the wharekura is an example of applying the over-riding principle of respondent orientation to survey design (Gendall 1998), and an example of a project informed by some kaupapa Māori principles as well, as it helped us improve engagement by allowing us the opportunity to consult with community stakeholders in a different cultural environment, regarding better ways to genuinely include Māori youth. Making sure our approach was orientated to the respondent, by survey translation in this instance, allowed for the chance to include a group in our research that would have otherwise been unavailable. Had we not inquired as to why the wharekura did not want to participate initially, and not taken steps to fulfil their wishes, this would have been a missed opportunity for all. Instead, we were able to open a dialogue about how we could overcome the barrier of survey language. We believe this fulfils-specific research expectations as described by Wyeth et al. (2010), relating to Articles II and III of the Treaty of Waitangi, and supports the principle of tino rangatiratanga (Ministry of Health 2001; Pihama et al. 2002; Walker et al. 2006; Wyeth et al. 2010).

This study confirms that a web-based survey is an effective and efficient way to survey older Māori adolescents, especially as a class-based exercise that can be incorporated into a wharekura curriculum. While the te reo Māori version took longer for students to complete when compared to the English version, the wharekura staff confirmed that the difference in the average time to complete the Māori version of the survey was attributed to the fact that Māori was the second language for most students at the school, and that the survey was utilised as an educational language exercise. This advises future work with regard to survey length.

This research has limitations, and serves as a valuable learning experience, for this research group and potentially for other researchers as well. For example, for research involving Māori, it is most advisable to begin with a predominately Māori research team and involve key organisations and groups from the very beginning, during preliminary research planning, and not late in the process, as was the situation here. If the translation had been as part of the research process from the beginning, there would have been the opportunity to incorporate different survey content or design, based on principles of respondent orientation and cooperative collaboration with the wharekura. Additionally, it would have been preferable to offer the te reo Māori version of the survey as an option to all Southland respondents, not only the wharekura students.

With regard to the translation process, while the double translation we engaged in is a best-practice method, the process of ‘decentring’ would have been an improvement on our translation procedures (Marin and Marin 1991). The use of the decentring method during the translation process involves a constant comparison, back and forth, between the two survey instruments (Marin and Marin 1991). In the case of the use of double translation in the current study, English was considered to be the most important language in the process, and it served as a guide that was followed and referred back to. Conversely, decentring allows for a ‘culturally and linguistically equivalent translation to evolve … [and] involves actual revision of the original instrument to fit the new research situation’ (Marin and Marin 1991, p. 76). Research suggests that when addressing translation via decentring developing both language surveys at the same time is desirable in order to prevent the survey from being based too deeply within one culture and language (Beaton et al. 2002; Potaka and Cochrane 2004; Center for Aging in Diverse Communities: Measurements and Methods Core 2007). Going a step further, the duel-development approach, in which survey questions are simultaneously generated in both languages, is employed by Statistics NZ (Potaka and Cochrane 2004).

While appropriate and beneficial, there are practical issues to consider with both decentring and duel-development methods. For example, duel-development may result in slightly different question phrasing or response options, meaning there may be issues of comparability across participants taking the survey in different languages. This would decrease the ability for researchers to analysis large amounts of data together. Furthermore, some researchers have begun to consider whether the same questions should be asked of all populations, and whether or not full cultural consideration might include providing different questionnaires (Center for Aging in Diverse Communities: Measurements and Methods Core 2007). This requires more research and is beyond the scope of this study.

This work helped us attain goals set out for us by the Ngāi Tahu Research Consultation Committee. The first goal, seeking advice and guidance from Māori stakeholders, was realised through the kanohi ki te kanohi hui with the wharekura staff. Through these hui, details with regard to the processes of translation and dissemination of the survey were discussed and agreed upon in order to engage appropriately with their students. Consulting with the wharekura staff prior to beginning the project and writing the survey would have been more appropriate than translating the survey retrospectively, and we have taken this lesson on board for our future research. In addition, we sought advice from, and then hired, a professional translator for the project. The second goal, dissemination of findings to Māori health organisations and communities, was achieved by distributing preliminary descriptive survey results to the wharekura. In keeping with a kaupapa Māori research approach, reporting of the research results were carefully considered, to ensure that findings were presented appropriately and meaningfully for Māori (Durie 1985; Health Research Council 2010; Cram 2017). While not the focus of this paper, ultimately, results were analysed by school, and region-wide, but not by ethnicity, because NZ Europeans were over-represented (85%) in the Southland-wide survey. Research shows that the way one’s ethnicity is viewed can be associated with health risk or disadvantage, and therefore is a determinant of health (Cormack et al. 2013; Harris et al. 2013). It follows, then, that reporting findings of transport and well-being by ethnicity could erroneously report an inequitable distribution of health determinants, due to the relatively low number of Māori respondents in our sample. Thus, an individual report of descriptive data was sent to the wharekura staff with the results from the Māori survey, as well as the results from Southland as a whole. Outcomes included that, for example, the wharekura respondents exhibited higher life satisfaction, more involvement in activities outside of school, and more licence uptake when compared to the Southland survey results as a whole. We will look to the wharekura for advice on what other organisations they would like to contact with the findings as we continue to complete our full analysis. This mutually beneficial and successfully completed research project will help continue to foster our relationships within the Southland Māori community.

The experience of translating our English language survey to te reo Māori was not only a powerful reminder of the significance of applying the principle of respondent orientation, supported by a kaupapa Māori approach, in a cross-cultural collaboration, but also proved to be a valuable research exercise that will impact our future work, and hopefully can provide recommendations for other researchers who wish to employ kaupapa Māori methods, by learning from our shortcomings. This experience is an example of the significance of the mixed-methods research approach, which allows researchers the opportunity to use qualitative tools to work outside of normal boundaries, and look at research issues from a new perspective. When contemplating survey translation, it is most advisable to seek buy-in from organisations and groups by collaborating with them early on in the survey translation process. This is not only an ethical approach, but one that will improve the quality of the partnership, as well as the quality of the survey itself, by allowing for full cultural consideration during the survey design, translation and dissemination processes. Thus, funding for translation work should be included in research proposals from the very beginning to avoid financial hurdles later. Finally, survey translation methods should include techniques such as those used with double translation, decentring and duel-development methods for accuracy and also to avoid bias toward one language.

The lessons learned during this translation project resonated strongly within the research team. As our research about transport and well-being progresses to the intervention stage, we plan to be further informed by kaupapa Māori research methods in order to genuinely collaborate with Māori participants and stakeholders, with inclusion from early on during project planning and the grant writing process. Other researchers are invited to access both the English and te reo Māori versions of the survey, by contacting the corresponding author. Various well-being, attachment and transport measures were used, along with questions about involvement in activities and access to services. The surveys could be used elsewhere as a whole or in parts.

Acknowledgements

Ngā mihi nui ki a Gary Davis, rātou ko Ne’kol Hura me ngā tauira o Te Wharekura o Arowhenua i te āwhina ki tēnei rangahau. Ngā mihi hoki ki a Komene Cassidy i tōna whakamāori ā-tuhi rawe. Thank you very much to the staff (particularly Gary Davis and Ne’kol Hura) and the students of Te Wharekura o Arowhenua, as well as translator Komene Cassidy, for their collaboration on this research. We also thank Philip Gendall, from the University of Otago, Department of Marketing, for his expertise in collaborating with us to write the English version of the survey.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by the Department of Preventive and Social Medicine and the Department of Geography, University of Otago.