Validación de entrevistas por juicio de expertos en el estudio de la inclusión educativa en el área de lenguas extranjeras

The purpose of this article is to show the experiences around the conceptualization, validation and implementation of interviews developed to analyze the educational practices that converge in second language teaching and learning processes to students with visual impairment in a Mexican public university. As a research strategy, three interviews were designed, validated (through the method of consulting experts) and applied to retrieve information on educational practices of an institutional, educational and social nature that have impacted the processes of teaching and learning a foreign language in students with visual impairment in the upper level. The methodological design consisted of five steps: 1) the elaboration of the instrument, 2) the implementation of the instrument, 3) the consultation


Introduction
The reasons, objectives and scope of inclusive education have been questioned and debated by education specialists for many decades (Deng and Guo, 2007;Ghergut, 2010;Malinen, Savolainen and Xu, 2012;Mustafa, 2011;Plancarte, 2017;Shevlin , Kenny and Me Neela, 2004;Unianua, 2012). These debates initially led to the emergence of policies, strategies, methods and techniques that aimed to create a just and dignified society for children with special needs. Currently, since the Incheon Declaration for Education 2030 (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [Unesco], 2016), there is the following commitment: Promote quality lifelong learning opportunities for all, in all contexts and at all educational levels. This includes greater equal access to quality technical and vocational education and training, higher education and research, paying due attention to quality assurance. (p. 8).
In this regard, Unesco (2016) considers that ensuring equal opportunities for all in education remains a global challenge. According to this organization, inclusive education actions are necessary to eliminate the obstacles that stand between the participation and performance of all students, and eliminate all forms of discrimination in the field of learning.
These actions must consider the diversity of their needs, capacities and particularities (Unesco, 2016).
In Mexico, as in the rest of the world, the presence of students with various disabilities in universities is a reality that cannot be ignored. Their professional training and preparation for the labor field is in the hands not only of the teachers, but also of those who administer the educational institutions and, of course, themselves. Seeing these students walk through the corridors of our universities and attend our own classrooms has led us to reflect on the current educational practices carried out by all the actors involved in their professional training, regarding the effectiveness and impact of these . For all the above, a research work was carried out in a public university in Mexico that aimed to analyze the educational practices that converge in the teaching and learning of foreign languages to students with visual disabilities at the higher level. For this study, we worked on the conceptualization and validation of three interviews aimed at the direct actors in the educational process, namely, students, teachers, and administrative personnel of the participating institution, with the intention of obtaining data that would allow us to answer Vol. 11, Núm. 21 Julio -Diciembre 2020, e110 the following question. Research: What are the educational practices developed by the participating higher education institution in attention to students with visual disabilities in the context of teaching and learning foreign languages?
To carry out this work, the interview was used as a strategy for data collection, which is a technique that, among its many advantages, satisfies the requirements of personal interaction originated by civilization (Acevedo and López, 2008).
It is worth mentioning that, in order to collect information that would make it possible to demonstrate the educational practices carried out by all the actors involved in the educational process focused on students with visual disabilities, two interviews were originally designed, one for students with visual disabilities (Ginsburg, 1997) and another for foreign language teachers.
Each one of the instruments was piloted and validated through the support of specialist professors in research methodology, educational inclusion, and foreign language teaching. As a result of the piloting and the validation of the instruments, it was decided to work three interviews, one for teachers, another for students with visual disabilities and one more for administrators, because the previous two were not enough to collect information regarding one of the study categories (Institutional).
The following lines present the process carried out from the conceptualization of the interviews to the implementation of these.

Materials and methods
The fleeting dynamics of daily life in higher education institutions in Mexico increasingly distances us from our reality, from the reflection of what we do and how we do it. This dynamic is permeating significantly both in our communication channels and in the mechanisms of knowledge transfer: classroom work is becoming more complex and, therefore, the optimal development of education. Given this panorama, reality becomes even more complex when the raison d'être of our actions is a student with visual impairment, a situation that leads us to question ourselves about the actions we carry out in the classroom and the impact of these with a view to their integral formation.
From a specific context such as that of foreign languages, and with the aim of gathering information that would make it possible to demonstrate the practices of an educational, social and institutional nature carried out by both teachers and students and coordinators that impact teaching and learning From foreign languages to visually impaired students, two interviews were originally designed, one for visually impaired students and one for foreign language teachers (Ginsburg, 1997). Through the following lines, the methodological process carried out for the validation of the interviews is detailed.

Interview with the foreign language teacher
In the case of the interview with the foreign language teacher, a double assessment was carried out framed in a five-step process (see figure 1). The first step consisted of conceptualizing the interview, which was applied to a subject with characteristics similar to those of the true study subjects (step two).
Step three was characterized by the approach to the experts, who were presented with the instrument, the audio (product of the pilot test) and the general description of the study for which it had been applied.
Step four consisted of reconceptualizing the instrument based on the recommendations provided by the group of experts. And finally, the final version of the instrument was presented to the experts for their approval. Step one. Initial release Regarding the conceptualization of the interview, gathering information that would account for the practices carried out by various actors in relation to three categories, namely Educational, Institutional and Social, in the context of the foreign language classroom, implied going back to students, teachers and administrators to times, spaces and situations in particular of their educational experience. For this reason, various expert validation processes were reviewed, among which we highlight the one from Galicia, Balderrama and Edel (2017) and the experience of Dorantes, Hernández and Tobón (2016), and interview guides, among which that of Ginsburg (1997). Ginsburg's (1997) clinical interview provided us with a guide on the structure of the items, which allowed us to contextualize the study subject by locating him in time and space.
At first, the interview of the foreign language teacher was prepared, after selecting the topics and constructs, which had the structure shown in Table 1. Based on a coherence matrix, another matrix was prepared that allowed organize the questions on the instrument, taking into account the categories and dimensions of the study.
Vol. 11, Núm. 21 Julio -Diciembre 2020, e110 Tabla 1. Visión gráfica de la entrevista inicial para profesores de lenguas extranjeras que atienden o han atendido a estudiantes con discapacidad visual Fuente: Elaboración propia A total of 35 questions made up the interview guide, which were grouped into three dimensions (Institutional, Educational and Social). The first and third dimensions had five questions that sought to identify information regarding institutional contributions in the processes of inclusion of students with visual disabilities and the interpersonal relationships between students-students with visual disabilities. The second category had 25 questions, which made it the largest section of the interview. The intention here was to obtain specific information on didactic, curricular, organizational and teacher training issues. Each of the dimensions, in turn, had a presentation: the approach to a situation that sought to place the teacher in a specific moment and space of her experience, which would allow her to remember the aspects that would be questioned.
Step two. Implementation (piloting) The interview was applied to an Italian teacher with experience in serving students with visual disabilities at the higher level, whose audio was recorded. Once this was done, both elements (interview guide and audio), plus the general description of the study (title, objectives, research questions and assumptions), were delivered to five experts for evaluation.

Step three. Consultation with experts (validation)
The experts were selected based on the following characteristics: 1) knowledge of foreign language teaching, 2) experience in educational inclusion, and 3) knowledge of the research methodology. The experts were contacted by telephone and the information was sent to them by email. The sessions for the validation of the instruments were carried out in the facilities of the participating institution, and in the specific case of an expert from another state of the Mexican Republic, it was worked through videoconference.
The assessment process was as follows. It was considered pertinent to take the instrument to its application to verify its correct design. For this purpose, two types of evaluations were used: the first sought to test the explanatory clarity of the sentences (of content) and the Vol. 11, Núm. 21 Julio -Diciembre 2020, e110 second, the efficacy of the data (efficacy of content) in order to carry out an analysis that would allow identifying the educational practices that teachers, students with visual disabilities and administrative staff carry out to promote the teaching and learning of foreign languages among students with visual disabilities. For the two types of assessment, it was considered to take a non-representative sample, one sample for each instrument.
With the aim of achieving the validation of the content of the items, an instrument was designed with seven situations and the 35 items of the interview, to which the following Likert scale was placed for the assessment of the five experts: value 1 corresponded to unacceptable; value 2 a deficient; 3 to regulate; 4 was acceptable, and 5 was efficient. At first, we worked on the evaluation of the situations and later on the evaluation of the items.
With regard to the situations that arise at the beginning of a group of questions, the first expert (foreign language teaching) assessed six situations as efficient and one as regular.
The second expert (a foreign language teacher with experience in assisting students with visual impairments) assessed six situations as efficient and one as deficient and recommended working on the writing of one of the items. The third expert rated five situations as acceptable and one as fair and recommended eliminating one situation. The fourth expert rated the six situations between efficient and acceptable. And the fifth expert rated four situations as acceptable, one regular and one as deficient (Table 3). Thus, for the most part, the situations were assessed positively. Regarding the situations marked with the lowest score, the experts agreed that these presented some deficiencies, for which they recommended reducing some of them, as in the case of situation five, in addition to grouping those activities that coincided with the logic of some of the other situations, as they seemed somewhat repetitive. Likewise, the recommendation was made to work on the wording of some of the situations and avoid being so repetitive with some terms. Finally, a new revision of the instrument was developed and the pertinent adjustments were made.
Regarding the 35 questions related to the Institutional, Educational and Social categories, the first expert rated them as efficient and acceptable and recommended revising the wording of some items. The second expert rated the content of the items between acceptable, efficient, regular and poor, and recommended asking more specific questions and thus avoiding saturation of some items. The third expert rated the content as acceptable, efficient, and fair.
The assessment of the fourth expert coincided for the most part with the assessment of the second expert, with values between acceptable, efficient, regular and deficient. The fifth expert rated the 35 questions between efficient and acceptable and recommended working on the writing of some of them, mainly recommended avoiding repetition (see table 4

E A E A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A E A E E E E E E E E E A A A A 163
Fuente: Elaboración propia Taking into account the set of recommendations made by the experts, the instrument was reviewed again and the pertinent adjustments were made; Among them, the discarding of some items and the reordering of these stand out, based on a logical sequence, regardless of the category to which they belonged.
With Step four. Reworking The structure presented below was achieved through the process of piloting and validation by experts, which allowed enriching the structure and initial contents of this instrument.
The foreign language teacher interview consists of a presentation that includes the objective of the interview and the general data of the interviewed teacher. The questions section consists of three situations that aimed to bring the foreign language teacher back to a specific moment and situation and 26 items distributed among the aforementioned situations. Each of these situations includes questions related to two of the three categories that the interview develops (Educational and Social). The first situation raises the following: "Let's think about that time when you were planning your foreign language class for the group in which a student with visual impairment was." Through this situation, the aim was to obtain information related to the planning and organization of the course. The four questions considered in this situation belonged to the Educational category.
The second situation that was considered was the following: "Let us think of the first foreign language classes in which a student with visual impairment was present." Through the 16 questions that make up this section, the aim was to locate the teacher at the moment in which he had his first contact both with the student with visual impairment and with his peers and the classroom.
The last situation that arose in this interview was the following: "Let's think about those sessions in which you developed some group activity with your foreign language students." This situation specifically presents six items related to the Social category, through which it is sought to obtain information about the interpersonal relationships between the teacher and the student with visual impairment and the latter, in turn, with their peers. Finally, thanks for participating in the interview and the project are presented.
Step five. Consensus with experts The expert committee was called again to validate the changes made to the initial version of the instrument and issued favorable results.

Interview of the visually impaired student
The interview of the student with visual impairment had the same treatment as that given to the interview with the foreign language teacher, with a double assessment (content and content effectiveness).
The interview was applied to an English student with visual impairment at the Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco, the audio was recorded and both elements (interview guide and audio) were delivered, in addition to the general description of the study to five experts for evaluation in the same month.

Instrument content validation
For the validation of the content of the items, an instrument was designed with the seven situations and the 35 items of the interview, and the Likert scale set out below was attached for the assessment of the five experts: 1 = unacceptable; 2 = poor; 3 = regular; 4 = acceptable; 5 = efficient. Regarding the situations that arise at the beginning of a group of questions, the first expert assessed the seven situations as efficient and recommended working on the writing of the items while respecting their content. The second expert (a foreign language teacher with experience in assisting students with visual disabilities) assessed five situations as efficient and two as deficient and recommended working on the drafting of these, seeking greater contextual specificity. The third expert assessed four situations as acceptable, one as efficient and two as regular, and recommended eliminating one situation, since he considered that two referred to the same context. The fourth expert rated five situations as acceptable and two as efficient, and issued the same recommendation as the previous evaluator. Lastly, the fifth expert rated three situations as acceptable, two as efficient, one as fair and one as poor (Table 6). Once the assessment of the content of the interview was obtained, it was observed that, for the most part, the items were valued positively. Regarding the items marked with a lower score, the experts agreed that these presented some deficiencies, for which they recommended reducing some situations, as in the case of item 5, in addition to grouping those activities that coincide with the logic of some of the other situations, since they seemed somewhat repetitive. Likewise, the recommendation was made to work on the wording of some of the situations and avoid being so repetitive with some terms. Finally, the instrument was revised again and the pertinent adjustments were made.
Regarding the content of the 35 questions related to the Institutional, Educational and Social categories, the first expert rated them among acceptable, efficient and regular, and recommended to eliminate some items, mainly those related to the Institutional category. The second expert rated the content of the items between acceptable, efficient, regular and poor, and recommended asking more questions so that the existing ones did not have as much information load, which could confuse the student. The third expert rated the content as acceptable, efficient and regular; in this case, the recommendation was to work on the drafting of the current items. The assessment of the fourth expert coincided with the assessment of the third expert, with values between acceptable, efficient and regular, and recommended the same as the previous expert. Finally, the fifth expert rated the 35 questions as acceptable, efficient and regular, and advised to work on writing some of them and avoid repetition (see table 7).

E R E A E E A A E A E A A A E A E A A E E A E R E E R E E E E E A E A 150
Fuente: Elaboración propia Taking into consideration the recommendations made by the experts, the pertinent adjustments were made. As in the previous instrument, here it is worth highlighting the discarding of some items and the reordering of these based on a logical sequence, regardless of the category to which they belonged, and the elimination of the Institutional category.

Validation of the effectiveness of the content of the instrument for conducting the semi-structured interview
In order to achieve the validation of the effectiveness of the content of the items in the interview guide for students with visual impairments, an instrument was designed with the 35 interview items, and it was submitted to the evaluation of five experts, as well as than in the previous cases; It was also accompanied by a Likert scale from 1 to 5, where 1 was to totally disagree; 2 was to disagree; 3 be neutral; 4 agree and 5 totally agree.
The main characteristic of this instrument is that it presented the objective of each item, the category to which it belonged and the corresponding indicator. The experts evaluated the effectiveness of the content in a very similar way to the evaluation given in the previous instrument. The five experts agreed on evaluating the majority of the items with the highest score; the lowest scores were assigned to the items corresponding to the Institutional category, under the argument of the little and practically null possibility of obtaining this information from the participating students (see table 8).
Following these recommendations, the instrument was revised again and the pertinent adjustments were made. As a result of this step, among other things, the elimination of the Institutional category stands out, the creation of a specific instrument for this aspect, the realization of new items and the reordering of these based on a logical sequence, regardless of the category to which they belonged. As already mentioned, as a result of the observations, a new instrument was developed focused on the institutional aspect and aimed specifically at the administrators and managers of the higher education institution. Fuente: Elaboración propia

Interview of the visually impaired student (final version)
The interview of the visually impaired student received similar treatment to that of the teacher interview. This section describes the final instrument that was used during the fieldwork stage of the aforementioned study. The interview of the student with visual impairment consists of a presentation that includes the objective of the interview and the general data of the interviewee. The questions section consists of five situations that aim to locate the student of foreign languages with visual impairment at a specific moment and situation of her experience in learning foreign languages.
Each of these situations includes questions related to the two categories that the interview develops (Educational and Social). The first situation raises the following: "Let's think about one of your foreign language courses." Through this situation, we seek to obtain information related to the learning strategies used by the student during a particular course.
The questions that were considered in this situation belong to the Educational category.
The second situation that was considered was the following: "Let's think about your first foreign language classes." Here the aim was to locate the visually impaired student at the time they had their first contact with both the teacher and their peers and the classroom.
The questions that were considered in this situation are also related to the Educational category.
With the aim of locating the student in the context of teaching and learning foreign languages at the top level, the third situation arises: "Let's think about the foreign language courses you have taken at the university." With the intention of obtaining information on the knowledge of the interviewee in relation to the foreign language, the following situation arises: "Now that you have finished your foreign language classes ..." accompanied by various items.
The last situation that arises in this interview was the following: "Let's think about those sessions in which your teacher developed some reading-writing activity." Specifically, this situation presents items related to the Social category, through which it is sought to obtain information on the interpersonal relationships between the student with a disability, the teacher and the rest of the students.

Manager interview
Based on the experience of piloting and validating the two instruments previously presented, the interview with the administrator (suggested by the experts during the validation process) was prepared, which did not require the validation process previously presented because they had already The situations and items that made it up in the previous instruments have been evaluated.
The interview for the administrator consists of a semi-free interview (Acevedo and López, 2008) in which the participant had to answer questions related only to the category called Institutional, a consequence of the validation of the previous instruments. The researcher asked pertinent questions related to her educational practice in the aforementioned aspects.

Instrument Description
The coordinator's initial interview guide contained the business name of the institutions involved, the purpose of the interview, and the coordinator's identification data, such as name, age, subject, and cycle in which said subject was studied. The instrument had 17 questions.
The interviews were carried out at different times, according to the availability of teachers, administrators and students with visual disabilities. Most of them were carried out in the morning in the teachers' room and the waiting room of the participating institution. The instrument used for these purposes was a digital voice recorder.
For the case of each instrument, once they were restructured based on the experts' recommendations, each of them was summoned and the interview guide was presented to Vol. 11, Núm. 21 Julio -Diciembre 2020, e110 them, which they reviewed and discussed. As a result of this meeting, the last feedback was obtained and the final version of the interview was prepared.

Discussion
The validation process of semi-structured interviews that was presented in this document allowed to know some aspects about the educational practices that converge in the processes of teaching and learning foreign languages in students with visual disabilities. We highlight the importance in these processes of the role played by the experts, since, without their serious and responsible participation, the products (three interviews) would not have been achieved.
Each step of the process had methodological implications that generated instruments elaborated according to a specific reality and the needs involved in it. In relation to the first step, this was possible through a good anchorage between the theoretical approach of the study and the methodological elements required for the structuring of a semi-structured interview. During step two, the process of implementing an interview was experienced, where essential aspects of the interview protocol were involved that focus on issues such as space and time.
Step three clarified the question of the tools and elements necessary for the expert consultation. It is worth highlighting the fact that an instrument must be analyzed taking into account the research and methodological context that gave rise to it. Steps four and five emphasize the importance of constant and permanent revision of the instrument before it is formally applied in the study.
Linked to the validity of interviews, previous studies have initially designed the instrument with the support of experts and have subsequently validated it through a pilot test (Mediavilla and García, 2013); Others have focused on the analysis of items from the interviews or have worked on validation of coded interviews, thanks to which they have obtained good results in their respective validation processes (Robles, Robles, Giménez & Abad, 2016). The study presented here was characterized by a double methodological assessment, content type and content effectiveness, in addition to presenting a double assessment, of situations and items of the instrument.
In relation to the results of the interview in the study on the educational practices that converge in the teaching and learning of foreign languages to students with visual disabilities at the higher level, these can be summarized as follows. Regarding the teaching of foreign languages to students with disabilities, the actors indicated that not in all cases there is a specific preparation for the attention to this population, which makes it difficult to teach the foreign language, and that in those cases in the Since the training has been carried out, it is not projected in the classroom, which opens a great void in the training processes.
Therefore, some teachers have chosen to design their own teaching strategies for these students, which have not been totally correct, according to the students, since they have mainly prevented them from developing writing skills. It was pointed out that, although the institution has been in charge in recent years of equipping its classrooms to provide a better service to these students and has acquired technological equipment and braille printing machines, this has not been functional due to the lack of socializing these actions and the lack of training for their teachers. With regard to learning, students indicate that they have specific strategies and tools for the development of the four language skills (receptive: reading and listening; productive: speaking and writing), however, their teachers ignore it; By doing this, they reveal the lack of communication between these actors.

Conclusions
From a methodological point of view, the interview guides were designed by the researcher, with the support of a group of experts; After obtaining high consensus and high reliability (Cronbach's alpha> 0.80), they were subjected to a pilot test and subsequently validated.
In this article we have exposed an experience that has made evident the importance of planning methodological structures in any research process. The wealth that, as a consequence of the application of methodological structures, it is necessary to reformulate questions to redirect the interpretation is widely appreciated. This document shows the importance of an adequate formulation of objectives and procedures that guide experts during the validation process and, thereby, avoid, among other elements, the burden of subjectivity in their responses.