Description: New childhood studies focus at the independent and competent behaviour of children (James/Prout 1990). Children construct their social world in an active way. How they outline their constructions in interaction is of special interest of peer culture studies. However, the problem about how we can collect material about the knowledge of children, about their perspective on world, remains.The paper starts from the point that with respect to childhood studies, researchers on the one hand regard children as strangers, as being members of another generation. On the other hand, they have their formed ideas about what is an "successful childhood", they have their opinions, ideals, and values relating to children.One often used method in research with children are ethnographical field studies. In a boys studies project we tested focus groups. Ten year old Boys were asked to talk about school, friends, spare time activities, and hobbies. Focussing on the boys' views of masculinity this paper concentrates on the interventions of the interviewer in focus groups: Can we get material about children's perspectives on world in focus groups? Or do we get material about the interviewers' constructions he or she brings in the discussion with his or her questions or other interventions? Methodology: Following Mannheim (1964,1980), special information about whole groups can be gained with focus groups: If the participants of a focus group are persons of the same generation, the manner in which people interact and the form of interaction, reveal "kollektive Orientierungsmuster" (collective patterns of orientation) of the groups, that is they reveal their common views and opinions. The focus groups in this study were analysed with a method of qualitative research (Dokumentarische Methode, Bohnsack 2005) which is based on Mannheim's theory of knowledge. The interpretation reconstructs common views and opinions of the group.After reconstructing the boys common constructions of masculinity, their different reactions on the interventions of the interviewer were compared. Conclusions: The different groups show varied constructions of masculinity Even if the interviewer's questions expressed a gender perspective, the groups interacted and answered in their perspective, so that the interviewer's intervention didn't disturb their gender constructions.We can conclude, that focus groups are a method to get knowledge about children's perspectives of the world.