Procedure and timeline

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.

national and international levels, and had been awarded for her work in the area of digital pedagogy. The pilot study contributed to revising instruments and addressing possible difficulties in the data collection process. For example, the teacher participating in the study highlighted some ambiguous questions which were modified in terms of meaning and wording. Another benefit of the pilot was that it helped to decide how much time should be dedicated to each main topic in the interviews and estimate their lengths.

Recruitment, permissions and access

Carrying out Study 2 required several approvals and permissions. First, the researcher requested ethical clearance from the Research Ethics Committee of the Eötvös Loránd University, Faculty of Pedagogy and Psychology. Once the ethical clearance was approved, the researcher contacted educational technology experts from the Eötvös Loránd University and Hungarian organizations promoting the use of educational technology to recommend potential teacher participants for Study 2 in accordance with the sampling criteria outlined in Section 5.2.2. Based on these recommendations a table was compiled containing recommended teachers’ names, primary subject areas, email addresses, schools, school locations, principles’ names. The scope of this table was to aid the second sampling stage, which followed the of maximum variance as outlined in Section 5.2.2, and to assist research management process. Selected teacher participants were then contacted and informed about the study through an information leaflet. Next, the researcher sent emails to the principals of those schools in which the teachers who agreed to participate worked, asking for permission to conduct the study. After principals’

verbal consent, the researcher brought the site permission form, teacher consent form as well as the student and parent forms to the schools. The researcher also maintained constant email and phone communication with participant teachers to schedule fieldwork and clarify any arising issues. The communication with participants also helped the researcher the gain participant teachers’ trust.

Fieldwork

Data for Study 2 were collected over a period of four months in the spring and summer of 2017, and autumn 2018. After piloting the study instruments and securing access and permissions, the researcher started the main data collection stage. Data were

collected from 12 digital pedagogy expert teachers selected to participate in the study by the procedures described in Section 5.2.3. A graphic representation of the data collection process from each teacher is provided in the following Figure 12.

Figure 12. Data collection process in Study 2

Each data collection method used during Study 2 was guided by a separate protocol to ensure that the ethical and methodological principles were met. In total 24 interviews were conducted with teachers following the Pre- and Post-Observation Protocols developed for this research (see Appendix C and Appendix E). Pre-observation interviews lasted on average about 18 minutes, while the post-observation interviews took about 60 minutes. Both types of interviews were conducted face-to-face in teachers’ schools, apart from one teacher who preferred to be interviewed after the observed lesson in a nearby café. The language of the interviews was Hungarian and the interviews were audio

recorded. Information about the pre- and post-observation interviews are detailed in the following Table 9.

Table 9. Details of the pre-and post-observation interviews in Study 2

Interviewee Pre-observation interviews Post-observation interviews

Duration Place Mode Duration Place Mode

Anita 15 mins classroom face-to-face 39 mins cafe face-to-face Susan 20 mins office face-to-face 60 mins classroom face-to-face Boris 20 mins comp. lab face-to-face 60 mins comp. lab face-to-face Elisabeth 21 mins office face-to-face 33 mins office face-to-face Judith 18 mins comp. lab face-to-face 57 mins comp. lab face-to-face Martha 19 mins comp. lab face-to-face 48 mins park face-to-face Bill 17 mins classroom face-to-face 33 mins office face-to-face Rose 22 mins office face-to-face 52 mins office face-to-face Ada 18 mins office face-to-face 57 mins laboratory face-to-face Albert 15 mins classroom face-to-face 70 mins classroom face-to-face Robert 12 mins classroom face-to-face 40 mins classroom face-to-face Zoey 17 mins art room face-to-face 57 mins art room face-to-face

In Study 2, 11 classroom observations were conducted. Teachers were asked to teach a 45-90-minute class period in which educational technology tools were used to stimulate students’ creativity. The class period was carried out as part of the regular classroom practice at a time that suited the teachers’ timetable and curriculum. The class was observed by the researcher, who collected data through note taking using the Classroom Observation Protocol (see Appendix D). At the end of each observation the researcher took three images of the physical learning environment in which the observed lesson was conducted, and which were used in conjunction with the observation notes in the analysis. General information about the observed lessons are contained in the following Table 10.

Table 10. General information about the observed lessons in Study 2.

Teacher Grade Subject Topic Duration

Anita 11^th EFL Speculating about people and places 45 mins

Susan 9^th EFL Culture: English speaking countries

(Review) 45 mins

Boris 9^th history The middle Ages (Review) 45 mins

Elisabeth 8^th history Introduction to the Napoleonic Era 90 mins

Judith 11^th language arts Drama: The Tragedy of Man 90 mins

Martha 11^th language art Symbolism 90 mins

Bill 11^th maths Analytic geometry equations (Review) 45 mins

Rose 9^th maths Inequalities (review) 45 mins

Ada 9^th physics Motion 180 mins

Robert 10^th visual arts Leonardo da Vinci 45 mins

Zoey 10^th visual arts Renaissance 45 mins

In total 17 documents were collected from teachers including lesson plans, project descriptions, digital material considered by participants to be illustrative of their experiences of nurturing creativity in technology integrated learning environments in their subject area. General information about the documents collected from each participant are detailed in the following Table 11.

Table 11. General information about the collected documents in Study 2

Pseudonym Document

abbreviation Characteristics Type

Anita (EFL 1) Doc 1. extant, private, full access, electronic, text

Lesson plan

Susan (EFL 2) Doc. 1 extant, private, full access, paper-based Student-created handouts Martha (HUN 1) Doc. 1 original, public, partial access, online,

multimedia

Teacher website featuring project descriptions and students work

Table 11 (continued)

Pseudonym Document

abbreviation Characteristics Type

Judith (HUN 2) Doc 1. original, public, full access, electronic, online and downloadable, text and

hyperlinks

Project plan

Rose (MAT 2) Doc. 1 original, private, full access, electronic, text and hypertext

Unit plan

Doc. 2 original, private, full access, electronic, text and hyperlinks

Project plan

Doc. 3 extant, private, full access, electronic, text

Lesson plan

Ada (SCI 1) Doc. 1 original, public, full access, online, text and hyperlinks

Project plan

Doc. 2 original, public, full access, online, text and hyperlinks

Project plan

Doc. 3 original, private, full access, online, multimedia

Students’ project portfolio Albert (SCI 1) Doc 1 original, public, full access, online, text

and hyperlinks

Project plan

Elisabeth (SOC 1) Doc 1. original, public, full access, online, multimedia

School website featuring project descriptions and students work Boris (SOC 2) Doc. 1 original, public, full access, electronic,

online and downloadable, text and hyperlinks

Project plan

Robert (ART 1) Doc. 1 extant, private, full access, paper-based Teacher-created handouts Zoey (ART 2) Doc. 1 original, public, full access, electronic,

online and downloadable, text and hyperlinks

Project plan

Doc. 2 original, public, full access, online, multimedia

Project website featuring student

work

In document DOCTORAL (PhD) DISSERTATION ’ : A N - ENIKŐ ORSOLYA BERECZKI (Pldal 129-135)