Chapter 5: Study 2 – A Qualitative Multiple Case Study of Beliefs and Practices
5.2 Q UAL I TATIVE M ULTIPLE C ASE S TUDY M ETHODOLOGY
5.2.2 Case selection and sample
In qualitative designs the goal of sampling is to identify information-rich cases that will allow the researcher to study a phenomenon in-depth (Creswell, 2013; Mertens, 2010; Patton 2002; Robson & McCartan, 2016). This goal is typically achieved by employing a purposeful sampling approach, which involves the purposeful selection of those participants whom the researcher believes will provide the best information about the situation under investigation (Patton, 2002). The selection of cases is thus based on their anticipated richness and relevance of information in relation to the study’s research questions (Yin, 2011, p. 311). There are a variety of strategies available to the researcher for purposefully selecting participants and data sources that fit the goals of the qualitative study (Patton, 2002). Study 2 applied three of the selection strategies described in the literature: criterion sampling, stratified sampling, and maximum variation sampling (Patton, 2002) presented in detail below.
Case selection
The goal of purposeful sampling was to select participant teachers able to provide expert opinion on the use of technology for nurturing student creativity across the secondary school curriculum. The sampling unit was represented by individual teachers
and the data collected from them through interviews, classroom observation, document, and image analysis. Participant selection was guided by the combination of criterion, stratified, and maximum variance sampling (Mertens, 2010; Patton, 2002; Robson &
McCartan, 2016). Criterion sampling requires the researcher to specify in advance a set of attributes, factors, characteristics or criteria that the study addresses (Mertens, 2010).
The predefined selection criteria as well as the reasons for their application are detailed in the following Table 7.
After selecting potential participants based on the sampling criteria outlined in Table 7, the research applied a stratified sampling technique (Mertens, 2010; Patton, 2002; Robson & McCartan, 2016). Thus, potential cases were divided in six subgroups based on the teachers’ main subject areas: arts, EFL, Hungarian language and literature, mathematics, science, and history. The sample of cases were then selected within these six strata by including two participants from each subject area into the final sample. Study 2 also applied the maximum variation principle: the researcher strived to include cases to maximize variation within the sample based on participants’ background information such as school type, and the location of school where potential participants taught at the time of the study, their age, gender, teaching experience. This allowed the investigation of commonalities and differences in teachers’ beliefs and experiences of nurturing creativity across diverse settings and personal characteristic.
The sampling strategy adopted yielded the identification of 12 digital pedagogy expert teachers to participate in the study. The sample size thus was in accordance with what the literature views as an appropriate size for the multiple case study approach, since the benefits of such approach might be limited if fewer than 4 cases are chosen or more than 15 (Stake, 2006, p. 22).
Sample
The final sample of Study 2 comprised of 12 digital pedagogy expert teachers nominated by educational technology stakeholders and selected through a combination of criterion, stratified and maximum variation sampling strategies as described in the previous section. The characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 8.
Table 7. Sample selection criteria in Study 2
Selection criteria Reason
Must have been teaching at secondary school grade levels.
Less emphasis has been given to teachers’ beliefs and practices of nurturing creativity in the secondary school context (Andiliou & Murphy, 2010; Study 1). The present study wished to fill the gap in the literature in this respect.
Must have been working as teachers for at least 5 years.
Research on teacher effectiveness suggests that teachers’
effectiveness increases with experience (Kini & Podolsky, 2016). Study 2 aimed to explore expert opinions on creativity and technology, the sample, thus, had to comprise experienced and effective teachers.
Must have been teaching the following curricular areas: EFL, Hungarian language and literature, mathematics, science, social science, and visual arts.
The aim of Study 2 was to explore digital pedagogy expert teachers’ beliefs and experiences of nurturing creativity focusing on five core subject areas of the high school curriculum: Hungarian language and literature, mathematics, science, history and a foreign language. Arts has been chosen for its special connection with creativity (Study 1)
Must have been recognized by other educational technology stakeholders as digital pedagogy experts based on the following performance criteria:
(1) have earned a local, regional, state, or national award for teaching with technology,
(2) have presented at local, regional, state, or national conferences on the topic, and/or have mentored younger teachers or teacher candidates on the topic,
(3) have earned awards or grant funds related to digital pedagogy,
(4) have received praise and positive feedback from parents, students, and colleagues for their technology-integrated teaching practice.
There is little benefit in seeking a random sample when this may be largely ignorant of particular issues and unable to comment on the phenomenon under investigation (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007, p.115). The purposeful selection of participants in Study 2 focused on teachers who excelled in the use of technology for teaching and learning.
In line with the literature, technology was considered an element of the creativity-fostering learning environment (Davies, 2013). To gain relevant and rich information on the relationships among creativity, learning, and technology from practitioners, the researcher decided to include participants highly knowledgeable about technology-integrated learning who were also recognized by others for their expertise. The beliefs and practices of teachers selected this way could provide meaningful insights to nurturing creativity with technology in the classroom.
Table 8. Characteristics of the sample included in Study 2
Pseudonym School School type School location
Subject
taught Age
Years of teaching experience
Academic background
Career stage
Post-graduate professional examination
Awards received
Anita (EFL1)
A general lower and upper secondary
Urban EFL 33 11-20 years MA Degree Teacher 1 no Teacher of the year (school level)
Susan (EFL 2)
B secondary vocational Urban EFL 52 21-30 years MA Degree Teacher 2 Educational Leadership
Award-winning digital pedagogy projects (international level) Boris
(SOC 1)
C secondary vocational Urban Social science
29 6-10 years MA Degree Teacher 1 no Best project award (school level) Instructor of the year (school level) Digital pedagogy project of the year
(national level)
Individual digital pedagogy award (national level)
Digital pedagogy team award (national level) Elisabeth
(SOC 2)
D general lower and upper secondary
Urban Social science
49 11-20 years MA Degree Teacher 1 no none
Judith (HUN 1)
E vocational Urban Hungarian
language and literature
59 more than 31 years
MA Degree Teacher 2 Digital pedagogy
Digital pedagogy project award (national level)
Martha (HUN 2)
F vocational Urban Hungarian
language and literature
48 21-30 years MA Degree Teacher 1 no Digital pedagogy project award (1 at national level, 2 at international
level)
Pedagogical innovation award (national level)
Table 8 (continued)
Pseudonym School School type School location
Subject
taught Age
Years of teaching experience
Academic background
Career stage
Post-graduate professional examination
Awards received
Bill (MAT 1)
G general lower and upper secondary
Urban Maths 37 11-20 years MSc Degree Teacher 1 no Digital pedagogy project award (national level and international level)
Rose (MAT 2)
H secondary vocational
Urban Maths 50 21-30 years MSc Degree Master
teacher
Educational Leadership
Digital pedagogy project award (national level)
Good practice featured on national digital pedagogy online repository Ada
(SCI 1)
F secondary vocational
Urban Science 50 21-30 years MSc Degree Master teacher
Mentor teacher
Digital pedagogy project awards (7 at national and 4 at international level) Albert
(SCI 2)
I general lower and upper secondary /
vocational
suburban Science 51 21-30 years MSc Degree Master teacher
Educational Leadership
Digital pedagogy project award (national level) Innovation in education award
(regional) Robert
(ART 1)
J general lower and upper secondary
Urban Visual Arts 36 11-20 years MA Degree Teacher 2 Educational Leadership
Best practice in gifted education and talent development awards (3 at
national level)
Teacher of the year (national level) Zoey
(ART 2)
K general lower and upper secondary /
vocational
suburban Visual Arts 45 11-20 years MA Degree Master teacher
General Digital pedagogy award (national level)
Participants in Study 2 were of both gender (8 female, 3 male) with ages ranging from 29 to 59 years (Mage = 44.92 years, SD = 9.05), and teaching at 11 different schools.
In terms of teaching experience, one teacher had between 6-10 years of teaching experience, five between 11-20 and 21-30, while one had been teaching for more than 30 years at the time of the study. As for school location, ten teachers taught in schools located in urban areas, whereas two in suburban schools. With concern to the school type, four teachers worked in general lower and upper secondary schools, six in secondary vocational schools, whereas two in both general lower and upper secondary, and secondary vocational schools. All 12 teachers had obtained MA or MSc degrees, and were in different stages of their career: five teachers in Teacher 1 stage, three teachers in Teacher 2, and four teachers in the Master Teacher stage. Seven of the 12 participants had also taken post-graduate professional examinations: four in educational leadership, one in mentoring, one in digital pedagogy, and one in a general area. Except for one teacher (Elisabeth), all participants had received professional recognition in form of local, national, and/or international awards.
The 12 teachers participating in Study 2 also reported to have diverse experience in the areas of creativity education and digital pedagogy as illustrated by the following Figure 11.
Figure 11. Participants’ experience with creativity education and digital pedagogy in Study 2