Data collection methods and instruments

environments a series of face-to-face semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with the participants. Teachers were asked to take part in pre-observation and post-observation interviews. The pre-observation interview focused on the use of technology to promote creativity during the lesson to-be-observed (For the pre-observation guide see Appendix C). The post-pre-observation interview aimed to explore teachers’ pedagogical beliefs about creativity and its nurture, with special emphasis on the role of technology in fostering creativity within the specific subject area taught. The interview protocol and questions were developed based on the main themes identified in the research literature on teachers’ beliefs about creativity and its nurture exposed by the Study 1 and on the analysis of the questions featured in the research instruments designed to explore teachers’ beliefs about creativity in the empirical literature reviewed in Study 1. The post observation interview also allowed to further questions emerging from the pre-observation interview and the classroom observation (see Appendix E for the post-observation guide). Further information about the practical procedures used to pilot and conduct the interviews will be provided in a later section (Section 5.2.4).

Semi-structured participant observation

The distinctive feature of the observation technique is that it offers the investigator first-hand accounts of social situations. Observational data allows the researcher to understand the situation being described (Patton, 2002, p. 264). Observation is often applied as a supportive and supplementary method to complement or set in perspective data obtained through other techniques. Researchers particularly employ observation in conjunction with interview and questionnaire methods, since responses in these latter are notorious for the discrepancies between what people say that they have done or will do and their actual actions (Robson & McCartan, 2016).

In Study 2 the classroom observation technique was used to support and complement data emanating from individual teacher interviews. While pre-and post-observation interviews offered insights into teachers’ self-reported views, understandings, experiences, and intents with regards to nurturing creativity in technology-integrated environments, classroom observations allowed data collection about teachers’ beliefs in action (Fives & Buehl, 2012). Also, the post-observation interview permitted the researcher to ask clarifying questions as well as offered teachers the opportunity to construe issues emerging from the classroom observation.

Study 2 applied a semi-structured approach to observation. In contrast to a fully structured observation which uses data to test predetermined hypotheses, a semi-structured and unsemi-structured observation is hypothesis-generating with the researcher reviewing observational data before suggesting explanations for the phenomena being observed (Robson & McCartan, 2016). The semi-structured observation applied in Study 2 focused on the details of what was happening in terms of teacher and student actions in time during the lesson, as well descriptions of how the physical and psychosocial environment looked (For the observation sheet see Appendix D).

The researchers’ role in observation may range from that of a complete participant taking on an insider role in the group under investigation to one of a complete observer, an approach within which participants do not realize that they are being observed (Cohen et al., 2007). Beyond ethical and methodological considerations, the researchers’

background also should be considered in role selection, since acceptance in the group may well be dependent on the researcher’s age, gender, and ethnic background (Mertens, 2010). To gain a first-hand account of teachers’ practices of fostering creativity in the classroom as an adult, yet to cause minimal disturbance I adopted the ‘observer-as-participant’ role, namely I was known as a researcher to the teacher and students participating in the observed lesson, but had less extensive contact with them.

Observation as a method tends to be very time‐consuming, which has led to the design of more condensed field experiences in education research in recent years. One possible strategy to achieve such condensed experience of observation is for the participant researcher to evoke a specific situation or behaviour from the participants (Robson & McCartan, 2016). In Study 2, digital pedagogy expert teachers were asked to allow the researcher to observe one of their lessons which they specifically designed to promote students’ creativity through the use of educational technology within their own subject areas. A major disadvantage of such an interventionist approach is that participants might act in a different way to please or placate the observer (Robson &

McCartan, 2016). In Study 2 the fact that the observed lesson might not be illustrative of usual practice was considered, however, it was not considered a threat. Teachers’ choices regarding the student group, the learning environments, the topic of the lesson, the teaching materials, methods and technologies applied, as well as the interactions among people and people’s interactions with technology in the observed lesson offered several insights on how teachers may or would promote student creativity with technology in

their own contexts. Further information on the practical procedures related to classroom observations applied in the study will be detailed will be provided in a later section (Section 5.2.4).

Image analysis

Visual images can play a useful role in the process of social research in a variety of ways. Images can be produced by participants and used as data, found or existing images can be used as springboards for theorizing, images and objects are useful to elicit or provoke other data, images created can be used for feedback and documentation of the research process, and they are useful as a mode of interpretation and/or representation (Weber, 2008, p. 47). In Study 2 the method of classroom observation was complemented with researcher generated images of the learning environment in which the observed lesson took place. Rather than taken as an objective representation of the truth, images were considered to provide a particular view of reality (Robson & McCartan, 2016), and were integrated accordingly in the research process.

Document analysis

Qualitative research may also examine documents to get the necessary background of the situation and insights into the dynamics of everyday functioning (Mertens, 2010, p. 373). Document analysis can render more visible the phenomenon under study (Prior 2003, p. 87). Study 2 used document analysis to provide further insights into digital pedagogy expert teachers beliefs about creativity and its nurture through technology.

Extant documents, both in paper and digital format were analysed. Participant teachers could share the planning document of the observed lesson with the researcher. In addition, teachers could also provide project descriptions, digital material created by themselves or by their students, which they thought were illustrative of their experience of nurturing creativity in technology integrated learning environments in their subject area.

An important drawback of using extant texts is that they may be highly biased and selective, since they were not intended to be regarded as research data but were written for a different purpose, audience, and context (Cohen et al., 2007). In Study 2, the documents provided by the participant teacher were analysed with an understanding of

the time, context, and intended use for which the materials were created as suggested in the literature (Mertens, 2010).

Demographic questionnaire

A paper-based demographic questionnaire was used in Study 2 which asked about participants’ personal characteristics and provided the contextual information necessary to make comparisons between the cases. The demographic questionnaire included information about teachers’ gender, age, the type of school they taught in, teaching experience, subjects taught, awards, and past experiences with nurturing creativity and technology. For the demographic questionnaire used in this study see Appendix F.